Is my first fatwa on its way?

Leicester Secular Society had a talk/debate this evening on Shariah Law. The speaker was a Sharia "judge" from the Islamist organisation Sunnah Leicester.

The point of his argument was to argue in favour of implementing Shariah Law, and the basis of it was to compare the worst problems of various international societies past and present against Sharia Law. There were two main problems with the argument given, (1) we were told nothing of Sharia, so it wasn't really what you'd call a comparison, and (2) it clearly committed the informal fallacy known of the false dilemma: there are more possible forms of society than those mentioned. Oh, and (3) he only compared Shariah with any given society on one or two points; not really what you'd call a proper cost-benefit analysis.

To break down the argument into it's fundamental components:

1. Shariah is based laws from Allah, Society A is based upon laws from man.


2. Society idea A (which was thought up by men) had problem X.


3. You wouldn't get X in Shariah.


4. Therefore; Shariah is better than society A.


5. Repeat above arguments with societies B-F


6. Therefore; Shariah is the best possible society.

As you may have noticed from the argument above; nothing was said about Shariah law (except that it doesn't have X). Which isn't really what you'd expect from a talk titled "Shariah Law". Perhaps it should have been titled "Shariah Law Surprise".

Anyway - onto how I'm on my way to my first fatwa. Someone at the back (one of the Muslims) had said that without Shariah there is much more of {crime A, crime B, crime C}. His list included rape.

Now, the thing is (sorry, we're going back a bit in time here for a bit of background) Muhammad invited the ruler of Egypt to join Islam. And although he didn't respond with a definite "yes"; he did respond with a gift. And that gift included a couple of Coptic Christian Slave girls accompanied by an elderly eunuch. This may sound funny now, but I'm sure it wasn't at the time. Especially if you were one of the slaves. And I wouldn't want to be the eunuch either.

Muhammad kept the slaves and had sex with them. His wives complained. But Muhammad had a "revelation" to deal with this. This essence of this revelation is Muhammad can shag is slaves whenever he wants, Allah said so, stop winging on about it. Sura (66:1-5).

So.... back to the more recent past. This chap had just talked about all the rape that's going on because of the lack of Shariah law. I thought that it would be fair to point out that Mohammad kept sex slaves and used them - and was therefore a rapist. Not an unreasonable amount of conjecture I thought.

"Listen, you better watch your mouth" I heard in a rather threatening voice. "Are you threatening me with violence?" I asked. "Yes" three of them responded.

I think it was Alexei Sayle who said something like "I'm convinced that it would be really funny if someone took the piss out of fundamentalist Islam. I'm also convinced that it shouldn't be me". He had a good point.

I was then informed by some members of the secular society that the particular brand of Islam being offered tonight was of the fundamentalist variety. Which to be fair should have been obvious from the beards alone. And the dress code. Oh, and their clearly stated goals of turning the whole world into a single state implementing Shariah Law.

Thankfully, a couple of society members escorted me to my car so I managed to get away unscathed.

There are good and bad sides to this. The bad side is obviously that I've been threatened with religiously motivated violence from a group of about 25 Islamic fundamentalists. The good side is that; when someone resorts to threatening violence, you must have won the argument.

Nutri-Energetics Systems

At a psychic fair in October 2007, I came across a stand advertising "Nutri-Energetics Systems - A New Paradigm in Healthcare". Could it be that I had found the holy grail of pseudo-science?



According to their literature (click on the picture to see it in full-resolution), it's a

"revolutionary approach to health, the culmination of 25 years of work into how physics explains biology - through the mapping of the quantum electrodynamics body-field"

.... and it marvel at the multi-disciplinary science:

"the NES-Professional system integrates research from the fields of physics, quantum biology, mathematics and Western and Chinese medicine."

Their claim is that there is a "human electrodynamics body-field" that they've been able to map with their incredible technology. Just pay £45 and put your hand on something that looks like a mouse with tin-foil attached. The system will "read your body-field and compare it to the optimum human body-field, which is encoded in the software".

And if your "human body-field" isn't optimum? They sell "NES Infoceuticals" (small bottles of water) for £12.

"Nutri-Energetics has devised a unique method of imprinting a base of organic colloidal minerals with information representing different aspects of the optimum human body-field. When you take an Infoceutical as drops in water, the QED information acts as a magnetic signpost to the subatomic particles in your body-field; aligning these particles helps to restore optimum health."

Hmmmm.........

My letter to the Advertising Standards Authority (see below) prompted an investigation and the appropriate Adjudication. Success!


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10 November 2007

Advertising Standards Authority
Mid City Place
71 High Holborn
London
WC1V 6QT

Ref: A07-43223/ROC

Dear Mr. O’Connell,

I have enclosed the leaflet as requested in your last letter.

It’s extremely difficult knowing where to start with this complaint. The scientific content in the leaflet has simply been made up. Honing in on any specific claim is difficult because the leaflet is comprised almost in entirety of fabricated claims.

I have spent some time going through your web site and picking out the various points that NES’s leaflet would appear to breach.

2.1 All marketing communications should be legal, decent, honest and truthful.

The leaflet is dishonest in that it consists almost in entirety of pseudo-scientific claims that have simply been made up. Specifically, there is no scientific evidence for the existence of a “quantum electrodynamics body-field”. This claim is untruthful; it is pseudoscience. Everything else in the leaflet stems from this claim (e.g their claimed ability to be able to measure this field and manipulate it with “Infoceuticals”).

3.1 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation.

Relevant evidence should be sent without delay if requested by the ASA or CAP. The adequacy of evidence will be judged on whether it supports both the detailed claims and the overall impression created by the marketing communication. The full name and geographical business address of marketers should be provided without delay if requested by the ASA or CAP.

As this is clearly pseudo-science rather than real science, there can be no credible documentary evidence to back up any of their claims. I have spent time looking for evidence on the Internet and all references to the “quantum electrodynamics body-field” seem to come only from NES or NES affiliated sites. This is clearly not a scientific theory.

The leaflet makes the following unsubstantiated claims:

· That they have managed to map a “quantum electrodynamics body-field”.

· That this body-field “acts as the master control system for the physical body”. (Note: Science has quite conclusively demonstrated that the master control system for the physical body is the brain.)

· That they have “devised a unique method of imprinting a base of organic colloidal minerals with information representing different aspects of the optimal human body-field.”

· That “When you take an Infoceutical as drops in water, the QED information acts as a magnetic signpost to the subatomic particles in your body-field”.

· That “aligning these particles helps to restore optimal health”.

· “The NES software is able to ‘read’ your body-field”.

6.1 Marketers should not exploit the credulity, lack of knowledge or inexperience of consumers.

The advertising material is specifically targeted to exploit consumers with a lack of scientific knowledge. By using scientific language such as “quantum electrodynamics”, “quantum biology”, “field” and “subatomic particles” they try to convince the inexperienced consumer that the product is based upon scientific investigation.

50.1 Medical and scientific claims made about beauty and health-related products should be backed by evidence, where appropriate consisting of trials conducted on people. Where relevant, the rules will also relate to claims for products for animals. Substantiation will be assessed by the ASA on the basis of the available scientific knowledge.

There appears to be no scientific basis for any of their claims. I can find no reference to clinical trials.

Again, the following claims are made:

· That they have managed to map a “quantum electrodynamics body-field”.

· That this body-field “acts as the master control system for the physical body”.

· That they have “devised a unique method of imprinting a base of organic colloidal minerals with information representing different aspects of the optimal human body-field.”

· That “When you take an Infoceutical as drops in water, the QED information acts as a magnetic signpost to the subatomic particles in your body-field”.

· That “aligning these particles helps to restore optimal health”.

· “The NES software is able to ‘read’ your body-field”.

I believe it is appalling that a company is trying to extort £45 for a “Consultation and scan” plus an additional £12 for “Infoceuticals” from ill people who are easily fooled. I do hope you take this complaint seriously.

I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,



Simon .

Proper labelling of Stem Cell treatments

Stem Cell research, we are told, is likely to lead to a revolution in medical care. And the possibility of science bringing such significant benefits to mankind, the Catholic church is naturally on a mission to put a stop to it.

Regardless of the outcome in the UK, the research will continue somewhere, and the treatments will be developed.

In all likelihood the Catholic church will continue protesting about the research and won't protest in the slightest about it's followers using the medication. They could do with a simple labelling system to help them remember. I've come across this petition for just that on the 10 Downing St web site here: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/StemCellLabels/.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to create a law that will require all treatments invented using knowledge gained from stem cell research to be labelled "unsuitable for Catholics".

Few petitions have such a low likelihood of succeeding, although that's not really the point of posting it. Why not sign up?

Ken Ham, Answers In Genesis

I visited a highly entertaining talk from Ken Ham the Australian creationist on 3rd April. Ken Ham is the founder of Answers in Genesis and is so desperate to hold onto his faith that he has needed to build his own museum to convince himself of this nonsense.

There's no real need for me to say what went on, as it has the visit was properly recorded by others here.

Most surprisingly, I found that Ken and I agreed on one detail. His fear of losing the belief in the Genesis creation story is that without it; the whole basis of Christianity falls down. Without Adam and Eve, there's no original sin. And without original sin; Jesus's sacrifice is pointless. Which makes the entire Christ myth a waste of time.

I couldn't agree with Ken any more on this point. I really don't understand how so many Christians can continue to think the myth has any significance without it. Ken's world-view is without doubt mumbo-jumbo. But at least it's consistent mumbo-jumbo.

Featured on www.love-tignes.com

PainSolv in The Times

The Times on 4th April 08 featured an ad for "PainSolv", which is a "therapy based on more than 30 years of worldwide research carried out by renowned scientists." Hmmmm.....

See the full ad here.

Apparently it works by "pulsed electromagnetic wave forms into the body, passing through all body tissue including bone without any impairment of wave strength".

Which is amazing because you'd expect that, if this thing has any effect, the wave strength might just be impaired.

But apparently it does work, it's been "clinically proven to have vigorous biological effects, influencing cell behaviour by inducing electrical charges around and within the cell wall membrane, the starting point for a strong immune system." and "The resulting natural reactions within the body helps to activate and regenerate cell function that can be beneficial for a wide range of conditions."

Where is the evidence please?

For the amount of money it costs to place an ad of this size in a national newspaper, they are going to have to rip a hell of a lot of people off before making a profit. Even at £129.95 + £5.95 p&p.

I've submitted a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority this morning:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

05 April 2008

New Complaints
Advertising Standards Authority
Mid City Place
71 High Holborn
London
WC1V 6QT

To Whom It May Concern:

I have enclosed a misleading advertisement in The Times on April 4^th 2008.

My complaints about this advert breaching your standards are as follows:

3.1 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove all claims, whether direct or implied, that are capable of objective substantiation.

Relevant evidence should be sent without delay if requested by the ASA or CAP. The adequacy of evidence will be judged on whether it supports both the detailed claims and the overall impression created by the marketing communication. The full name and geographical business address of marketers should be provided without delay if requested by the ASA or CAP.

50.1 Medical and scientific claims made about beauty and health-related products should be backed by evidence, where appropriate consisting of trials conducted on people. Where relevant, the rules will also relate to claims for products for animals. Substantiation will be assessed by the ASA on the basis of the available scientific knowledge.

“PainSolv encourages your body to enhance the efficiency of cell functions which in turn increases oxygen content in your blood as well as many other beneficial processes.”

(a) This claim breeches 3.1 and 50.1 as there is no credible evidence to suggest that the product enhances efficiency of cell functions.

(b) This claim breeches 3.1 and 50.1 as there is no credible evidence to suggest that the product increases oxygen content in the blood.

“PainSolv can help relieve the pain associated with the following conditions and many more – Arthritis, Back Pain, Migraine, Whilash, Joint Pain, Muscle Spasm, Stress, Leg Ulcers, Gout, Tendinitis.”

(c) This claim breeches 3.1 and 50.1 as there is no credible evidence to suggest that the product works better than placebo for any form of pain relief.

“PainSolv works directly on the cause rather than just the symptoms!”

(d) When combined with the claim that the product relieves pain from arthritis, the advertisement is making the claim that the product can repair damage to joints or remove infection of joints. As there is no credible evidence for this, this claim breeches both 3.1 and 50.1.

By charging £129.95 + £5.95 P&P, this company is extorting money from vulnerable people in pain, who are easily fooled. This in itself is a breech of 6.1.

Yours sincerely,

Simon.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------