CultNEWS101 Articles: 9/8/2025

Research Request, Persuasion, Pseudo-Psychological Training Courses, FLDS, Kingdom of God Global Church

Rachael Reign, founder of Surviving Universal UK (SUUK), is running an anonymous cult mapping survey to better understand people's experiences of high-control and coercive groups in the UK. The findings will be used to inform policy and provide up-to-date insight into the scale and nature of cults in the UK. If you've been affected or have knowledge to share, you can take part here: https://forms.gle/hnSf8uwP9zLQ4L8P8

IJCAM: Cults and persuasion: Submission as preference shifting, Luigi Corvaglia

"The literature on mind manipulation is often spoiled by the specious use of the metaphor of "brainwashing". This is sometimes done under the guise of emphasising the irrationality of manipulation and showing that it lies outside the realm of science. This paper will instead show how the findings of experimental psychology and behavioural economics lead to the identification of a process of change in thinking and behaviour that can be described in scientific terms. This process is achieved through a slow self-selection of recruits and an equally gradual increase in requirements. The classic Milgram experiment is a suitable instrument for explaining this. The framing effect identified by Tversky and Khaneman, which is so important in marketing, can bring about counterproductive decisions in a context that makes them reasonable for those who make them. This is to show that there is nothing magical or metaphysical about mind control, as long as it is understood as a process of conditioning that works through progressive selection and leads to an increase in conformism in a closed environment. Instead, the idea of rational choice, on which the defence of manipulative cults is based, is displaced from the scientific realm."

"In this article, Luigi Corvaglia critiques the simplistic framing of cult influence as either "brainwashing" or "free choice." Drawing on psychological research and real-world cult behavior, he presents a nuanced model of gradual persuasion and preference shifting. Cult membership, he argues, is shaped through cumulative, socially reinforced decisions influenced by cognitive biases, emotional salience, and bounded rationality—not through magic or total autonomy. The paper reframes cult behavior as scientifically understandable and ethically pressing."

Lorita Tinelli Psicologa: The Seduction of the Ineffective: A Scientific Deconstruction of Pseudo-Psychological Training Courses

How the Wellness Industry Exploits Cognitive Biases to Sell Infallible Certainties at the Expense of Evidence

"In an era characterized by growing complexity, economic uncertainty, information overload, and a generally competitive climate, the human need for stability, control, and self-improvement reaches historic peaks.

It is in this fertile humus that a multi-billion dollar industry thrives: that of personal and professional training, which promises quick fixes, simple keys to success, and profound existential transformations.

These programs, often offered in the form of intensive courses and seminars, unfold in contexts that mimic the aesthetics of science without adopting its substance, leveraging deep and universal needs: the desire for belonging, the fear of being inadequate, the search for purpose.

The need for certainty makes the individual vulnerable to the allure of the promise of an absolute truth: a clear path to finally becoming free and happy."

People: Where Are Warren Jeffs' 80 Wives Now? A Look at Their Lives After the Cult Leader Was Imprisoned for Sexually Assaulting Minors

" ... Warren had over 80 wives in what he called "spiritual" marriages. Many of his former wives have spoken out against the convict, including Briell Decker, who was his 65th wife.

After escaping the organization, Decker spoke to The Guardian in 2018 about her experience marrying him at 18 years old, describing him as "creepy."

"When Warren was around, I'd go into hiding," she said. "If I didn't, I'd have to be part of the temple stuff that he was doing," elaborating that meant sex acts.

However, one of Warren's wives continues to defend his innocence. Naomie Jeffs — who was considered his "favorite" wife — was first married to Warren's father when she was 18 and he was 83, becoming his 17th wife, according to Oxygen. A month after Rulon's death in 2002 at age 92, Naomie married Warren.

She later became his scribe, taking notes during his ceremonies and sermons, as well as from recordings of his day-to-day activities. She described the role as 'an honor.'

Naomie stands by her belief that Warren is innocent."

WFLA: 'Markings of a cult': Family members say they were cut off from loved ones by Kingdom of God Global Church

"Family members say they were cut off from communicating with their loved ones by the Kingdom of God Global Church.

On Wednesday, the FBI raided a home in the exclusive Avila Community, north of Tampa, that is associated with the church.

The federal government says church leaders controlled where and when the workers slept, when and what they ate, what they wore, how they spoke, and when they could go to the bathroom.

David John is the lead pastor at the Impact Church in Detroit and says one of his family members was taken in by the Kingdom of God Global Church."

Documents filed in federal court say workers were forced to put in long hours in call centers to raise money to support the lavish lifestyles of church leaders.

News, Education, Intervention, Recovery

CultMediation.com   

Hindu nationalists claim that ancient Indians had airplanes, stem cell technology, and the internet

Sanjay Kumar

Science

February 13, 2019

New Delhi—The most widely discussed talk at the Indian Science Congress, a government-funded annual jamboree held in Jalandhar in January, wasn't about space exploration or information technology, areas in which India has made rapid progress. Instead, the talk celebrated a story in the Hindu epic Mahabharata about a woman who gave birth to 100 children, citing it as evidence that India's ancient Hindu civilization had developed advanced reproductive technologies. Just as surprising as the claim was the distinguished pedigree of the scientist who made it: chemist G. Nageshwar Rao, vice-chancellor of Andhra University in Visakhapatnam. "Stem cell research was done in this country thousands of years ago," Rao said. 

His talk was widely met with ridicule. But Rao is hardly the only Indian scientist to make such claims. In recent years, "experts" have said ancient Indians had spacecraft, the internet, and nuclear weapons—long before Western science came on the scene. 

Such claims and other forms of pseudoscience rooted in Hindu nationalism have been on the rise since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power in 2014. They're not just an embarrassment, some researchers say, but a threat to science and education that stifles critical thinking and could hamper India's development. "Modi has initiated what may be called ‘Project Assault on Scientific Rationality,’" says Gauhar Raza, former chief scientist at the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) here, a conglomerate of almost 40 national labs. "A religio-mythical culture is being propagated in the country's scientific institutions aggressively." 

Some blame the rapid rise at least in part on Vijnana Bharati (VIBHA), the science wing of Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), a massive conservative movement that aims to turn India into a Hindu nation and is the ideological parent of Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party. VIBHA aims to educate the masses about science and technology and harness research to stimulate India's development, but it also promotes "Swadeshi" (indigenous) science and tries to connect modern science to traditional knowledge and Hindu spirituality. 

VIBHA receives generous government funding and is active in 23 of India's 29 states, organizing huge science fairs and other events; it has 20,000 so-called "team members" to spread its ideas and 100,000 volunteers—including many in the highest echelons of Indian science. 

VIBHA's advisory board includes Vijay Kumar Saraswat, former head of Indian defense research and now chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University here. The former chairs of India's Space Commission and its Atomic Energy Commission are VIBHA "patrons." Structural biologist Shekhar Mande, director-general of CSIR, is VIBHA's vice president. 

Saraswat—who says he firmly believes in the power of gemstones to influence wellbeing and destiny—is proud of the achievements of ancient Hindu science: "We should rediscover Indian systems which existed thousands of years back," he says. Mande shares that pride. "We are a race which is not inferior to any other race in the world," he says. "Great things have happened in this part of the world." Mande insists that VIBHA is not antiscientific, however: "We want to tell people you have to be rational in your life and not believe in irrational myths." He does not see a rise of pseudoscience in the past 4 years—"We have always had that"—and says part of the problem is that the press is now paying more attention to the occasional bizarre claim. "If journalists don't report it, actually that would be perfect," he says. 

But others say there is little doubt that pseudoscience is on the rise—even at the highest levels of government. Modi, who was an RSS pracharak, or propagandist, for 12 years, claimed in 2014 that the transplantation of the elephant head of the god Ganesha to a human—a tale told in ancient epics—was a great achievement of Indian surgery millennia ago, and has made claims about stem cells similar to Rao's. At last year's Indian Science Congress, science minister Harsh Vardhan, a medical doctor and RSS member, said, incorrectly, that physicist Stephen Hawking had stated that the Vedas include theories superior to Albert Einstein's equation E=mc2. "It's one thing for a crackpot to say something like that, but it's a very bad example for people in authority to do so. It is deplorable," Venki Ramakrishnan, the Indian-born president of the Royal Society in London and a 2009 Nobel laureate in chemistry, tells Science. (Vardhan has declined to explain his statement so far and did not respond to an interview request from Science.) 

Critics say pseudoscience is creeping into science funding and education. In 2017, Vardhan decided to fund research at the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology here to validate claims that panchagavya, a concoction that includes cow urine and dung, is a remedy for a wide array of ailments—a notion many scientists dismiss. And in January 2018, higher education minister Satya Pal Singh dismissed Charles Darwin's evolution theory and threatened to remove it from school and college curricula. "Nobody, including our ancestors, in written or oral [texts], has said that they ever saw an ape turning into a human being," Singh said. 

Those remarks triggered a storm of protest; in a rare display of unity, India's three premier science academies said removing evolution from school curricula, or diluting it with "non-scientific explanations or myths," would be "a retrograde step." In other instances, too, scientists are pushing back against the growing tide of pseudoscience. But doing so can be dangerous. In the past 5 years, four prominent fighters against superstition and pseudoscientific ideas and practices have been murdered, including Narendra Dabholkar, a physician, and M. M. Kalburgi, former vice-chancellor of Kannada University in Hampi. Ongoing police investigations have linked their killers to Hindu fundamentalist organizations. 

Some Indian scientists may be susceptible to nonscientific beliefs because they view science as a 9-to-5 job, says Ashok Sahni, a renowned paleontologist and emeritus professor at Panjab University in Chandigarh. "Their religious beliefs don't dovetail with science," he says, and outside working hours those beliefs may hold sway. A tradition of deference to teachers and older persons may also play a role, he adds. "Freedom to question authority, to question writings, that's [an] intrinsic part of science," Ramakrishnan adds. Rather than focusing on the past, India should focus on its scientific future, he says—and drastically hike its research funding. 

The grip of Hindu nationalism on Indian society is about to be tested. Two dozen opposition parties have joined forces against Modi for elections that will be held before the end of May. A loss by Modi would bring "some change," says Prabir Purkayastha, vice president of the All India People's Science Network in Madurai, a liberal science advocacy movement with some 400,000 members across the country that opposes VIBHA's ideology. But the tide of pseudoscience may not retreat quickly, he says. "I don't think this battle is going to die down soon, because institutions have been weakened and infected."

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/02/hindu-nationalists-claim-ancient-indians-had-airplanes-stem-cell-technology-and

Alarm over appeal of pseudo-therapies in Spain

Experts warn of serious consequences if authorities do not take action to counter the growing popularity of treatments like reiki



An alternative health center.Jaap Buijs
JAVIER SALASEl PaisApril 24, 2018

Apparently Spaniards are somewhat confused over the scientific basis of so-called pseudo-therapies, with experts warning of grave consequences. The last Sociological Investigation Center (CIS) survey carried out in February included questions on pseudo-medicine such as homeopathy and reiki for the first time. Despite the lack of concrete proof that pseudo-therapies can be effective, Spanish society appears hazy on what distinguishes conventional medicine from the pseudo variety.


While some expressed skepticism over the effectiveness of pseudo-therapies and explained they wouldn’t resort to them because they didn’t work, more stated that they hadn’t used them either because they were expensive, they didn’t know about them or they hadn’t needed them, suggesting they could resort to them in the future.

Practices like yoga that truly promotes well-being gets confused with reiki which is simply a trick


HEAD OF THE OBSERVATORY AGAINST PSEUDOSCIENCE JERÓNIMO FERNÁNDEZ “The data clearly confirms the confusion,” says Josep Lobera, a researcher at the Autonomous University of Madrid who says of homeopathy, “Most people think it’s a [conventional] medicine because it is sold in pharmacies in its box, with a prospectus and even prescription.”

It turns out a significant number of the medical profession are in favor of alternative therapies –18.4% of pseudo-therapists have the support of healthcare professionals while 14% have been informed about a pseudo-therapy at their health clinic.
According to Elena Campos, president of the Association for the Protection of the Sick from Pseudoscientific Therapies (APETP), “People go to a professional because they believe they are going to help them be cured but you could actually be getting further away from the chance of [the right] treatment. It has highlighted the need to inform the public in general and also train [medical] professionals so that they know what they are up against.”


https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/04/19/inenglish/1524134049_353111.html

Putin's Great Patriotic Pseudoscience

Russia has a proud history of scientific inquiry and advancement. Now the Kremlin is investing in academic kooks and conspiracies.

Foreign Policy
MARIA ANTONOVA
NOVEMBER 29, 2016


MOSCOW — The award ceremony had all the trappings of legitimacy: a trendy loft venue not far from the Kremlin; a rapturous, inquisitive, and mostly young audience; and a jury made up of top scientific minds.

The prize at stake, however, was not about whose research had been the most cutting-edge or who had made the greatest contribution to Russian science that year. The jury, instead, was charged with determining who had been most successful in “bringing the light of ignorance to the masses.” Those voting cast their ballots into a tin-foil hat.

In the end, October’s inaugural “honorary member of the pseudoscience academy” award went to Irina Yermakova, a biologist and regular commentator on Russian national television. Yermakova is on the record as believing that men, as a sex, evolved from early hermaphrodite Amazonians. She’s one of Russia’s leading anti-GMO campaigners, claiming that genetically modified foods are actually an American bioweapon aimed at committing genocide against Russia. In handing her the award, Russia’s scientific community was seeking to demonstrate that, even in trying times, it hasn’t lost its sense of humor. The event organizer, Alexander Sokolov, a science journalist and award-winning author, issued a defiant proclamation from the stage: “Let as many people as possible see that science is alive in Russia and that it can defend itself!”

Except there’s growing evidence it can’t.

Science is under assault in the land that has produced some 17 Nobel Prize winners in the sciences. It’s not just that funding has been slashed (though it has) or that the field struggles with corruption and brain drain (though it does). Members of the scientific community say one of the biggest issues they face is the recent embrace of pseudoscientists like Yermakova by the Russian state. The Kremlin has elevated and institutionalized their ideas, often mixing them with a healthy dose of anti-Western rhetoric for good measure.

Yermakova, for example, in addition to her TV spots, has appeared as an expert before the Russian parliament, where populist lawmakers use her to back up their case against genetically modified foods. “Russia has been pressured into GMO after its accession to the [World Trade Organization],” majority party member of parliament Yevgeny Fedorov told state channel Rossiya 24 in 2014 in words that echoed Yermakova’s views. “This is political pressure; its goal is to create risks of sterilization” to shrink the Russian population, he said. Russia passed a law in July banning production of genetically modified foods, despite repeated protests by the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Other believers in fringe pseudoscience who have been elevated to positions of authority include Mikhail Kovalchuk, a physicist from Vladimir Putin’s inner circle who presides over the Kurchatov Institute, a nuclear energy research institution. Last year (the same day Moscow began its bombing campaign in Syria), Kovalchuk gave a presentation to Russian senators warning that the global elite, overseen by the United States, is developing a special human subspecies — a genetically different caste of laboring “servant people” who eat little, think small, and reproduce only on command. (Buried beneath the wacky conspiracy theory and anti-Western hyperbole was a lobbying pitch for more state funding so that his institute could stay ahead of the curve on groundbreaking research.)

In some cases, these figures have already done real damage. Kovalchuk is one of Putin’s top science advisors, a veteran senior member of his science council who is also the brother of Yuri Kovalchuk, a man the U.S. government has called the “personal banker” to senior Russian officials. Kovalchuk’s connections were expected to make him an eventual shoo-in for Russia’s top academic post as president of the Academy of Sciences. The academy’s membership, which selects both members and leaders in democratic votes, unexpectedly resisted Kovalchuk, however; his bid to become a full member of the academy, a requirement to head it, was rejected in 2008.

This and other moves by the academy to reject Kovalchuk are believed to have led to a backlash in 2013, when the Russian government moved to dismantle the institution: It took away most of the academy’s property, diluted its ranks by combining it with the less rigorous agriculture and medical academies, and curbed its independence, subjecting it to the supervision of a newly created state agency for scientific organizations. The reforms have done “great damage” to the academy, an institution that dates back to the 18th century and serves as the nerve center for a network of Russian scientific institutions, said science journalist Alexander Sergeyev. They’ve buried scientists in paperwork and subjected them to the control of non-scientists. Meanwhile, Kovalchuk’s Kurchatov Institute is becoming increasingly powerful and has assumed control over some of the academy’s research centers.

Believers in, and peddlers of, pseudoscience now occupy positions throughout the Russian government. Anton Vaino, Putin’s virtually unknown chief of staff, who was elevated to the post in August, published academic work in 2012 on the “nooscope,” a baffling mystical instrument that he claims can forecast and control society and the economy by scanning the universe. The Kremlin’s ombudswoman for children, Anna Kuznetsova, appointed in September, reportedly believes in telegony — the archaic theory that a woman’s child bears the traits of all her past sexual partners. “Such people in power is a new trend that shows that the authorities are no longer afraid of people that are overt carriers of pseudoscientific ideas,” Sergeyev said. “On the contrary, the authorities are ready to accept them and to be under their influence.”

The Russian government’s seeming vendetta against legitimate science is no coincidence, critics say. The Kremlin has discovered that pseudoscience fits its present ideological needs.

In September, the academy’s special commission to fight Russian pseudoscience published a report that found that its rise was in part tied to the country’s growing isolation and nationalism. Russians who reject global scientific norms have treated this ideological shift as an opportunity to lobby for government support for their projects. The report concluded that unscientific ideas and projects have thrived in recent years in part by “speculating on pro-regime ideologies.” Kovalchuk, for example, has theorized that Russia could stay ahead of Western science by funding an undefined field he calls “convergent technologies”; another argument, currently popular in Russia, is that established methods for fighting the spread of HIV, such as condom use, are in fact an American tool to weaken Russia. “The pseudo-patriotic rhetoric that surrounds these para-scientific topics allows their lobbyists to rise to a level far higher than their competence,” the academy’s report said.

Meanwhile, the growing link between nationalism and pseudoscience has allowed pseudoscientists to accuse their critics of being unpatriotic Russophobes. Anatole Klyosov, a Russian biochemist who worked in the United States before veering off into genetics, last year opened a Moscow-based “academy” for DNA genealogy, a field he claims to have discovered and upholds as a “patriotic science.” In the 10 books he has published since 2010, Klyosov has advanced outlandish claims, including the idea that the human species originated in the Russian North and that the view that humans derived from Africa is an expression of Western political correctness.

In 2015, a group of scientists from various fields wrote an open letter saying Klyosov’s writing could fuel hatred by “attracting readers whose nationalist and political ambitions are not satisfied with the world’s scientific body of knowledge.” Klyosov responded in his latest book, which he called Lies, Insinuations, and Russophobia in Modern Russian Science, dismissing his critics as members of a “fifth column.”

In addition to creating a climate that supports pseudoscience, the Kremlin seems to be making efforts to cut off legitimate Russian researchers from the outside world, said Sergeyev, who is part of the academy’s pseudoscience-fighting commission. Whispers last year indicated some universities are reviving the Soviet-era requirement that administrators vet scholarly papers before publication while others have imposed a ban on professors giving interviews without first receiving permission.

Russia has a mixed historical legacy when it comes to science policy. Science in the Soviet Union enjoyed relative prestige, especially fields that had applications for the military, space, and nuclear research. Students, beginning from a young age, were encouraged to pursue physics and mathematics in particular (the country’s proud stock of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists attests to the success of those efforts), and universities headhunted promising students to work in secret government labs in relatively comfortable conditions.

But the country has also long been susceptible to the potent combination of political power and pseudoscience. Research on an idea known as the Torsion field theory, for instance — which claimed to be able to explain telekinesis and levitation, among other phenomena — secretly received funding from the Soviet military and the KGB in the 1980s despite rejecting basic principles of physics.

The darkest example of state support for pseudoscience comes from the period between the 1930s and the 1960s. That was the heyday of a biologist named Trofim Lysenko, who became a darling of Joseph Stalin.

Lysenko was everything the dictator wanted in a scientist: a plain-spoken man from a peasant family, eager to put science to work for the people. Appointed to head the Soviet agricultural academy in 1938, Lysenko went on to set Soviet science and agriculture back decades by promoting baseless ideas, including methods for transforming rye into barley, and insisting that schools reject Mendelian genetics.

What might have been a scientific debate between geneticists and agronomists like Lysenko who rejected natural selection turned into something else entirely with Stalin’s overt support for the latter. The government amplified Lysenko’s slander against his opponents (state media discredited geneticists as “misanthropic fruit fly lovers,” proponents of eugenics and imperialism), and hundreds of Russian scientists who challenged his ideas were sidelined, exiled, or killed. The most famous victim of what came to be called Lysenkoism was Russian ethnobotanist Nikolai Vavilov, who dedicated his life to eradicating famine and created the world’s largest collection of plant seeds in St. Petersburg. Vavilov came to be highly critical of Lysenko’s ideas, however, and as a result was labeled a traitor and died in prison in 1943.

Lysenkoism was summarily discredited, and the taboo on genetics discarded in the 1970s and 1980s, after the departure of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, a Lysenko supporter. Meanwhile, Vavilov’s name now graces several prestigious Russian institutes, including the Institute of General Genetics in Moscow. In recent years, however, Lysenko has crept back into the realm of respectability, riding on the coattails of the rehabilitation of Stalin himself.

In 2014, a book that was at least partially sponsored by a state grant from the Ministry of Communications — titled Two Worlds, Two Ideologies — represented the argument between Lysenko and opponents as one between “patriots” and “national traitors.” Articles praising Lysenko appear regularly today in national newspapers: One 2015 article in the newspaper Kultura erroneously said, “Agricultural methods developed by the academic are still used in the entire world.” It continued: “If one were to analyze facts objectively, one would have to say that Lysenko was without question an extraordinary man.”

“Pseudoscience exists in all countries, but it is like cancerous cells: A healthy organism rejects them and does not let them grow,” said Svetlana Borinskaya, a geneticist who works at the Institute of General Genetics. “A sick organism is not able to react.” There are signs in Russia that the cancer is taking hold: An annual study by the Higher School of Economics, a research university in Moscow, found in 2015 that the number of Russians who felt that science and technology bring more harm than good was 23 percent. The ratio of positive to negative views of science places Russia 30th out of 31 countries in a ranking of how much they value scientific progress; the study called it a “worrying signal.”

“Even educated people are starting to talk about reptilians that have taken over and are plotting in the world government,” Borinskaya said. The influence of such ideas on Russian society has been strong enough that one news website, Gazeta.ru, has created a special subsection in its science department called “Obscurantism” to expose fake science. “Pseudoscience and obscurantism harm real researchers and harm the public,” said Gazeta.ru’s science editor, Pavel Kotlyar. “They harm the elderly babushkas who absorb the nonsense about various health gadgets and water filters.”

Russian scientists have begun to fight back. In addition to the pseudoscience academy award and several independent popular science projects, a group of online vigilantes has been exposing widespread fraud in Russian Ph.D. dissertations since 2013 as part of a project called Dissernet. The practice is widespread in the social sciences, Andrei Rostovtsev, one of Dissernet’s founders, told me. The fake dissertations are then defended in corrupt dissertation councils in what amounts to a vast criminal business that has impaired entire fields, particularly economics.

Many of these fraudulent dissertations were produced by people who go on to become parliamentarians, Rostovtsev said. Others serve the Kremlin as politically convenient “experts”: After Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 went down over eastern Ukraine in July 2014, for instance, Moscow brought out of them, Ivan Andriyevsky, on state television to back up its theory that MH17 had been shot down by a Ukrainian fighter jet. Andriyevsky showed a crudely altered satellite image of a plane to a reporter as evidence. A few days later, Dissernet looked into his dissertation and found that 17 of 26 pages in the work on Russia’s defense industry, for which he received a Ph.D. in economics, had been copy-pasted from other work, with heavy plagiarism on most of the other pages as well.

Rostovtsev describes Dissernet as a symbolic tool for Russia’s legitimate research community to maintain its reputation and build solidarity but doubts it will help hold any Russian officials directly accountable. The same is likely true for the academy’s pseudoscience award, whose trophy shows a sad reptilian creature posing like The Thinker and sitting atop an Egyptian pyramid. A few days after the pseudoscience ceremony, I called the organizer, Sokolov, to ask if Irina Yermakova had yet to collect it. She had not.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/29/putins-great-patriotic-pseudoscience/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New%20Campaign&utm_term=%2AEditors%20Picks&wp_login_redirect=0

Is the Scientology Personality Test Scientific?

The Committee for Skeptical Inquiry
Skeptical Inquirer
Carrie Poppy
June 17, 2016

The Church of Scientology is notorious for its aggressive outreach tactics, from bogus Hollywood seminars to free “movie tickets” for Dianetics: The Film. But none is so quintessentially Scientologist as the Oxford Capacity Analysis (OCA), or “personality test.”

The Church of Scientology claims that their personality assessment combines three elements—one’s IQ, personality, and aptitude—to give a unique perspective about a person’s strengths, weaknesses, and what they can do to improve their lives. The test is free and often marketed as quick (though my own test had me there for about three hours). Unfortunately, the test itself is about as scientific as an online quiz (e.g., “Are you a Monica or a Phoebe?”). The test itself has been barely examined by statisticians and social scientists, and with terrible results, but nothing drives this home more than going to the church and taking the test yourself.

When I entered Scientology’s “L.A. Org,” I knew exactly what I was getting into, and that the OCA was at best a religious recruitment tool, though many are not so lucky. My co-host, Ross, and I had visited the building for our podcast, “Oh No, Ross and Carrie,” as part of our investigation of personality tests. Unbeknownst to us, setting foot in that building would spark an investigation of the Church itself, spanning nine episodes over four months. But on that day, we just wanted to see whether the OCA would give us any special insight that other personality tests, such as the famed Myers Briggs Type Indicator, didn’t offer. We were quick to find out that the test is free, but followed by a sell no softer than a time share meeting.

Once inside the building, Ross and I were quickly greeted by a young receptionist. As we explained that we were there to take the personality test, voluntarily, rather than being prompted on the street, her eyes grew wider.

“You just heard about us and wanted to take the test?” she asked, mystified.

Her response didn’t exactly surprise us. After all, in the wake of Going Clear andTroublemaker—two famous exposés with enormous cultural saturation—foot traffic into “Big Blue,” Scientology’s big Los Angeles facility (Scientology calls their churches “orgs”), wasn’t exactly active.

We were taken to a side room and sat down in cubicles with tall sides, keeping us from cheating by trying to sneak a peek at someone else’s personality. The 200 questions, all of which can be found at the OCA’s website, range from the typical: “When others are getting rattled, do you remain composed?” or “Do you normally let the other person start the conversation,” to the not-so-typical: “Do you consider the modern ‘prison without bars’ system doomed to failure?” and “Are you in favor of color bar and class distinction?”

Each question has options for yes, no, and maybe (or, in previous versions, “Don’t know”). A Sea Org member in a three-piece suit advised that I choose the thing that seems most true to me now and that I shouldn’t over-think any questions. Having just completed the Myers Briggs inventory, I was used to pegging my personality into tiny boxes. Are you the life of the party? AM I EVER! Are you scientific and rational in your thinking? YOU BET I AM!

Proud to have finished the 200-question beast, I plunked my pencil down on the table and raised my hand. The man returned to deliver the bad news he must give several times a day: the test is not one, but three. He set down another test, “Just a quick one to make sure we got that one right,” he said, and set an alarm clock for five minutes. When that one was finished, I was given one final quiz: an IQ test, also timed. By that point, I was sick of the bait-and-switch, and eager to have my fortunes read by Sea Org members.

A Swedish woman (who immediately told me she was Swedish and here on study) invited me to her desk to discuss my results. On my way there, I passed a young woman who appeared to be about nineteen, crying as she reviewed her results.

“I just don’t always know who I am or what I want,” she said, leaning over her checkered skirt and crying into her hands.

“Absolutely, and that’s reading here on your test,” replied her aid. I wanted to tell the young woman that not knowing who you are or what you want is exactly where you should be at nineteen, and that if everyone became the thing they wanted to be at nineteen, the world would be overrun with music producers and clever T-shirt companies.

As I sat down with the woman who would review my test, she glanced at the paperwork, then back at me, in my Mickie/Minnie sweater and (at the time) shock of pink hair.

“Oh!” she said, “You’re very intelligent.”

“Well, thank you,” I said, feeling better about this test that obviously had been very insightful.

Paulina, as I will call her, then reviewed the scores on all three of my tests. I had “very high” aptitude, as evidenced by my ability to do things like circle the verbs in a sentence, and an IQ of 136 (full disclosure: Ross beat me out by eleven points, at 147). But more importantly, the OCA was here to save me from myself by identifying the pieces of my personality that don’t serve me well, for example, impulsivity.

“You make impulsive decisions, yes?” Paulina asked me, pointing to a dot on the line graph on her printout.

“Um, hm, I don’t think I make bad impulsive decisions. But I do like to be spontaneous. Live in the moment, go do something you think of right then even if you didn’t plan on it. That sort of thing.”

“Well, this says you’re impulsive.”

“Oh.”

The session went on like this, with Paulina asking me if an adjective was true of me, then telling me what the results said. My results didn’t seem particularly extreme, but Paulina was digging deep to nail down exactly what to tell me I should change. Work? No, my work life was going fine. Personal self-esteem? No, I felt confident and self-assured more than I had at any other time in my life. Finally, she landed on romance.

“How are things with your boyfriend?” she asked, pleadingly.

“Wonderful!” I said, smiling and nodding with self-satisfaction.

“Well, it may start out that way, but over time, things can go bad,” she replied. “You should take a class on how to keep it wonderful.”

Then she led me across the room to a desk under a sign that said “REGISTRAR,” and introduced me to Howard (not his real name, either), who would give me the hard sell. Paulina explained to him that I needed a relationship course so that my so-far-so-good relationship wouldn’t fall apart over time. Howard dismissed Paulina and looked over my printout, nodding along to the ups and downs of my personality.

“I’m not sure this is the right course for you,” he said, pointing out that my relationships with others looked pretty strong, and that I had no major conflicts to report. But as the conversation wore on and he realized that none of the other Scientology classes would clearly benefit me, he agreed with Paulina’s assessment. A relationship class would keep my loving partnership from turning sour.

“Would you like to sign up for that, today?” he asked.

“No, I would like to sleep on it,” I said, trying to find any way to get out of there without giving them my credit card information. I explained that recent science has suggested that sleeping on big decisions actually helps us make better ones. Not to mention that I was keenly aware that he was using social pressure to make me sign up for a class I had never requested, but one can’t say such things out loud and make friends.

“Have you ever made a good decision quickly?” asked Howard.

“Yes, sure. But I’ve also made bad ones quickly, like anyone. And anyway, Paulina said I’m too impulsive.”

Beaten at his own game, Howard allowed me to put off my decision about the class until the next day, but sent me on my way with a booklet about relationships. I gave him its $5 cover price in sympathy, knowing that as a Sea Org member, he might be making as little as $50 a week. I tried to exit right away, but was sent through a parade of L. Ron Hubbard themed displays before I could fully exit. Unsurprisingly, I would hear from Scientology the next day, asking me to join their next class.

From my experience, it is clear that the OCA functions mostly as a way to get people in the door so the Scientology pitch can be made. But what about the science behind it?

The OCA clearly benefits from its deceptive name. It is in no way associated with the prestigious University of Oxford, despite one woman at the Org telling Ross that it was developed there. According to a research paper by Scientologist John H. Wolfe, published on the Social Science Research Network, the test was sloppily copied from the Johnson Temperament Analysis (JTA), “a psychological test of poorly documented validity.” Furthermore, he says, the OCA has none of the checks and balances that even the JTA has. Wolfe goes on to advise “establishing some degree of validity for the OCA would make the large database of OCA test results in the Church of Scientology case history archives relevant and useable for outcome research.” In a rare peek behind the curtain, we see a Scientologist and mathematician advise that the Church show a modicum of effort to make their test scientific.

The test itself appears to have no peer-reviewed research behind it, before or since its inception, and has been criticized widely by psychologists. In one UK government report titled “Enquiry into the Practice and Effects of Scientology” (or “The Foster Report” for short), Sir John Foster reveals that his researchers took the tests themselves, giving a variety of different answers, but that no matter how the test was taken, the results showed that the taker had personality traits that scored in the “unacceptable” field and needed to be fixed with Scientology classes.

In a similar but far more cheeky experiment, Dr. David Delvin took the same test but chose “Don’t know” as the answer to every single question. The Scientology representative administering the test not only did not notice, but returned with a printout with the same kinds of wild variations seen on all the others and recommended all sorts of classes specifically geared to his new pupil.

The Foster Report goes on that psychological professionals nearly universally reject or ignore the OCA, and that its lack of any scientific standing presents “an extremely strong case for assuming it to be a device of no worth.”1

The OCA appears to be nothing but an attempt to get recruits in the door, and promise them success with the smell of science to back it up. But you’re far more likely to find satisfaction in that online quiz we mentioned before. Personally, I think I’m a Phoebe.

1 Dr. David Delvin in World Medicine, 1969. As reported in The Foster Report.http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/audit/foster05.html#recruitment

http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/is_the_scientology_personality_test_scientific

Crosstalk: Science and Pseudoscience in This ‘Age of Magic’

SUNIL LAXMAN

The Wire

April 20, 2016

There have been many clashes of civilization over the centuries, over which the fate of humanity hung. Perhaps the biggest one that remains is that between science and pseudoscience.

“Science is the most durable and non-divisive way of thinking about the human circumstance. It transcends cultural, national and political boundaries.”
– Sam Harris

What is not science?

If you randomly ask three different people what they think science is, you’ll get three different answers. Often, these answers are at two ends of a spectrum. One end will describe science as “a collection of facts”, while the other suspiciously looks at science as a belief system. Yet, science is neither. It is a systematic effort to accumulate knowledge based on evidence, and form testable explanations about the universe. Science relies on recognising patterns, and being able to generalise rules from them, which can be tested, and if false, eliminated.

Unfortunately, treating science as a mere collection of facts is easy. After all, science textbooks are full of information, and our current education system glorifies the memorisation of these bits of information. Generations have grown up memorising formulae that state that force equals mass times acceleration, or famously E=mc2 and the like, without the faintest clue about what this means, or how these came about, and why these stand to be true. Easier still is treating science as a belief system, which is a reflection of our society, and of human nature. Since we as humans rely on belief systems for many things in our life, we tend to impose the values of our belief systems to all systems. Yet, science stands alone in being not a system, but a process, where the pursuit of knowledge relies on collecting knowledge based on evidence.

The amazing thing about science is that anyone can think like a scientist. However, if you just observe, collect information, and think something “feels right”, or that something “makes sense”, this isn’t sufficient to be science. For something to become a scientific endeavour, an observation will lead to a hypothesis, which then needs to be empirically tested. Indeed, in earlier columns, we have explored these aspects of the scientific method and the process of science, ranging from the importance of a testable hypothesis to inductive reasoning, through conditions that enable science to thrive.

Through this, we can easily understand attributes of science. Science is never complete, but a continuing, dynamic process with constant refinement. Knowledge constantly accumulates, and science constantly progresses. So it is important to be able to differentiate what is science, from what is unscientific. Verifiability (by testing and analysing a hypothesis) remains a cornerstone of science, but this is often difficult to actually do. For example, it was difficult to verify that light is both a wave and a particle (though it did happen). In this, the philosopher Karl Popper stands out in his simple benchmark for distinguishing what comprises science. Instead of just verifiability, Popper describes the use of falsifiability as the benchmark of scientific theories.

Unlike verifiability, falsifiability is the inherent possibility that any idea can be proven false. Now, in order to be able to question a hypothesis or an idea, you at least need to be able to theoretically falsify it or prove it wrong. By using falsifiability as a demarcation criterion, anything that is (even theoretically) not falsifiable becomes unscientific. This is a remarkably simple, and elegant way to think of what is scientific. This notion of falsifiability, when scrupulously applied, is very effective in weeding out the unscientific. This then allows you to separate science, from the all-pervasive, pernicious influence of that remarkable shape-shifting beast, pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience is a belief that masquerades as science and even extensively uses terminology from science to claim validity. One defining aspect of pseudoscience is to start with a conclusion, and then find “facts” that support it. This also means that the field cannot change since inception. Any challenge to an existing idea is considered hostile, and any observation that is not consistent with the original idea is usually thrown out. The very possibility of falsifiability is impossible. And to be effective, pseudoscience cloaks itself in scientific sounding words (“inner energy”, “positive molecules”, “refined antioxidants”, “cosmic balance”) that are utterly meaningless.

Science everywhere

Carl Sagan brings these concepts together in his book The Demon-Haunted World, where his famous dragon appears. Supposing you say that a fire-breathing dragon lives in your garage, surely I’d ask you to show me. But now, what if you assert that the dragon is invisible? In that case, I’d say you could use paint on the floor to find its footprints. But if the invisible dragon also floats in the air, and no solid object can mark it? Then I’d ask to measure the heat from the fire. But now if you assert that the invisible, flying dragon also breathes heatless fire? Here, more than verifiability, every possibility of falsifiability fails, and so you are left holding on only to belief. In this space where pseudoscience thrives, there are really no goalposts of ideas, and not just merely shifting goalposts.

But why might it even be important to separate the scientific from the unscientific? Venki Ramakrishnan, the president of the Royal Society, and who’s pioneering work on how proteins are made led to a Nobel Prize,notes ruefully in a column that if you say you don’t know anything about music, or hate art, or despise reading, you are an uncultured ignoramus. However, it is perfectly fine (or even a badge of honour) to say you know nothing about science or math, or that “you hate science”. Yet science, which is so pervasive in every aspect of our society, should be something that is enjoyed, appreciated and celebrated every bit as much as art and culture.

Even if not for the grandeur of understanding the natural world, there is a great need to understand the scientific process. As Arthur C. Clarke famously said, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Today, we live in an age of magic. A hundred years ago, a simple infection from a wound would invariably be fatal. In World War I, many more soldiers died of hospital infections than actually killed in battle. By World War II, this was not a problem, thanks to thediscovery of antibiotics, which have saved millions of lives. Sadly, people today know more about wines or craft beer than how antibiotics work (or how antibiotic resistance comes about). This list of magical science is everywhere; in medicine, in transportation, in communication, in protection from the elements, or in how we produce enough food to sustain more people on earth at this moment, than have lived in all humanity before 1950. Today, it is critical for every educated person to know how scientific knowledge is acquired, and how scientific foundations are built. It should be embarrassing for someone to say they know nothing about science, or how to recognise something as scientific, and yet it isn’t!

Falling for pseudoscience

What all this does is create an ideal breeding ground for pseudoscience. When everyone is exposed to scientific sounding words, without either an understanding of what they are, or an appreciation for the scientific method, pseudoscience can flourish. One of the oldest examples of pseudoscience was in the field of phrenology. People claimed to know the intelligence of an individual merely by measuring the size of their skull, and observing the number and shape of the bumps on their head. Today, phrenology is considered absurd, because it easily fails every test of falsifiability, with a mountain of evidence to show that this is meaningless. Yet, this field influenced colonialism (and Europeans with their “superior skulls and therefore brains”), slavery (and the abolishment of it), gender stereotyping (with women obviously holding the short end of the stick), and more. But even today, ask a bunch of people if the idea of phrenology is true and the answer will be split evenly between yes, maybe it could be true, and no.

What has this thriving culture of pseudoscience led to? The most obvious is the breeding of a variety of quackery, with the quacks becoming persons of enormous influence and importance in that society. Their voices thunder about the brilliance of ancient knowledge, easily feeding into conspiracy theories of how the ancient knowledge was lost or looted by invaders. Or, there are absurd claims, which easily fail the falsifiability test, that cancer or AIDS or whatever else can be easily cured. Usually, this should fall under the category of snake oil sales, yet cultures of pseudoscience will tolerate, and even promote such quackery. A thriving culture may flourish on how the knowledge of the exact time of birth, mapped on to a meaningless sample of planetary orbits can reveal the fate of that person, or knowledge of their likely misfortune.

Few pseudoscientific fields have had as much influence over the centuries as astrology (not to be confused with astronomy, which is a serious study of planetary bodies). Confusion through belief in such pseudoscience can lead to a paralysis of the ability of a person to make rational, effective decisions, or worse. Immense harm has been done by the pseudoscience of the anti-vaccine movement, which based itself entirely on one now falsified study (a deliberate fraud of epic proportions). Yet the anti-vaccine movement not only relies on that study, but even imagines a conspiracy theory where the whole proving of the study to be false itself was fabricated, ignoring a mountain of scientific evidence. As a result, vaccines, which have saved more lives (and eliminated devastating diseases like small pox and polio), now run the risk of not being effective, putting millions of children at risk.

There have been many clashes of civilisation over the centuries, over which the fate of humanity hung. Perhaps the biggest one that remains is that between science and pseudoscience. We know the lessons of history, but can we learn from it?

Sunil Laxman is a scientist at the Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine, where his research group studies how cells function and communicate with each other. He has a keen interest in the history and process of science, and how science influences society.

http://thewire.in/2016/04/20/crosstalk-science-and-pseudoscience-in-this-age-of-magic-30552/

Should naturopaths be restricted from treating children after tragic death of Alberta toddler

Sharon Kirkey

National Post

April 4, 2016

 

Nineteen-month-old Ezekiel Stephan
 died in March 2012 of viral meningitis

Before her creeping uneasiness with naturopathic medicine finally drove her from practice, Britt Marie Hermes says she watched colleagues deliver advice that was bad, to dangerously incompetent.

She witnessed missed diagnoses of cancer. She watched naturopaths routinely advise against childhood vaccinations and treat aggressive illnesses with the same “immune boosting” herb Ezekiel Stephan was given while the Alberta toddler was dying from meningitis.

Now, as Ezekiel’s parents stand charged in his death, ethicists and health-policy experts say the case is raising troubling questions about whether naturopaths should be restricted from treating children.

There are provincial bans on indoor tanning beds for minors, as well as bylaws keeping children under 16 out of tattoo parlours “because of possible harm to children,” notes University of Calgary bioethicist and lawyer Juliet Guichon.

Just because medicine isn’t perfect doesn’t make naturopathy a reasonable alternative

“There’s also the consent aspect — that children aren’t mature enough to say no to these outfits,” Guichon said.

The same principles could be applied to naturopathy, she suggested. “If (children) are not mature enough yet to say, ‘Mum, I’m not going to that quack, I need to go to a doctor,’ then there could be an argument for a legal restriction to protect children.”

Nineteen-month-old Ezekiel died in March 2012. His parents, David and Collet Stephan, who operate a nutritional supplements company, have pleaded not guilty to failing to provide their son with the necessities of life.

Court has heard that, in the days leading up to Ezekiel’s death, the couple, thinking Ezekiel had croup, treated the child with natural remedies and homemade smoothies.

After a family friend and nurse told the mother he might have meningitis — an infection that causes inflammation of the layer of tissue that covers the brain — Collet purchased an echinacea tincture called “Blast” from a Lethbridge naturopathic clinic. By then the boy was so sick and stiff he couldn’t sit in his car seat.

The naturopath has testified she was busy with a patient when Collet called ahead of her visit to the clinic, but that she told a staff member to tell the mother to take the boy immediately to hospital. She said she remained by the phone long enough to confirm the message was relayed, and that she was never asked if echinacea would be a good treatment for meningitis.

Under cross-examination, the jury heard the naturopath never told police she had stayed by the phone while the advice was passed on. A worker in her clinic also told investigators she introduced the naturopath to Collet when she arrived at the clinic, and described her as the mother of “the little one with meningitis.”

The trial is scheduled to resume April 11.

University of Alberta health-policy researcher Tim Caulfield says the tragic death is exposing the sharp and dangerous limits of naturopathic medicine.

Caulfield, who has long argued that naturopathy operates in the realm of “pseudoscience,” said he’s “sympathetic to the idea of restricting the kinds of services they can provide kids.”

“We do a lot of things to protect children and, at a minimum, I get very worried when kids are being taken there,” he said.

Alberta licenses naturopaths, as does Ontario and several other provinces, regulation Guichon said gives the field a “cloak of respectability and professionalism” it may or may not deserve.

“But the behaviour in Lethbridge suggests that they’re not professional, because a professional would have called the Director of Child Welfare and said, ‘This parent is unwilling or unable to provide the child necessary medical treatment,’ ” Guichon said.

Grandfather of dead toddler speaks out.

Caulfield said naturopaths are increasingly positioning themselves as “some kind of substitute for a family physician” offering evidence-based treatments, when much of what they advertise, according to his research, has no foundation in science.

“They want to have the best of both worlds,” Caulfield said. “But if you’re going to be a science-based practitioner, you shouldn’t be providing homeopathy, you shouldn’t be providing iridology or high-dose intravenous vitamin injections.”

The College of Naturopathic Doctors of Alberta said it could not comment on matters involving an ongoing criminal trial.

In hindsight, I’m really lucky nobody got hurt

Hermes, who practiced as a licensed naturopath in the U.S. for three years before leaving to pursue a career in biomedical research, said she frequently prescribed herbs for infections she was “fairly certain were viruses.

“In hindsight, I’m really lucky nobody got hurt,” said Hermes, who wrote about Ezekiel’s case in her blog, Naturopathic Diaries.

When parents are “naturalistic fanatics” it can be nearly impossible to convince them to go to the doctor when their child needs real medicine, she said.

“My argument is not, and never has been, that medicine is perfect,” Hermes said. “But just because medicine isn’t perfect doesn’t make naturopathy a reasonable alternative.”

Calgary pediatrician Dr. Ian Mitchell said many people, including parents of young children, have a distrust of conventional medicine “and an almost magical belief that there is some pill or preparation called ‘natural’ that will wipe things away.” 
But he said restricting naturopaths from seeing children would only drive things underground and discourage parents from telling doctors about natural products they might be using that could have “disastrous” interactions with other medicines.

“We want people to be open with us,” he said, which means not condemning or judging parents.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/should-naturopaths-be-restricted-from-treating-children-in-wake-of-death-of-alberta-toddler

Fernando Frias, the scourge against homeopathy

EMILIO J. MARTÍNEZ
Elmundo
March 27, 3016

(Google translation)

Do not walk with hot towels and says what he thinks without equivocation.The Alicante lawyer Fernando Frias , skeptical (and nerdy) calling itself, gave on Friday a talk in Elche organized by the Association for Science Popularization of Elche (ADCElx) in which, under the title Coven in college , quite explicit by the way, he has tried to raise awareness of "numerous cases" in which calls psneudoscience "have crept" in public bodies, and in particular at universities. A topical issue after the University of Barcelona, ​​the most prestigious of Spain, announced a few weeks ago that canceled his master of homeopathy "for lack of scientific basis."

"This is a supposedly therapeutic system is based on two ideas, to cure an ailment must produce similar symptoms and that the more the remedy is diluted more powerful it is." Frias defines the controversial homeopathy, alternative medicine industry created more than two centuries ago whose effectiveness has not been proven beyond the placebo effect.

In addition to homeopathy, also amember of the ARP-Society for the Advancement of Critical Thinking, lists other pseudoscience as "therapeutic sects" , "pyramidology, or even" the absorcismo "as alleged therapies that have been taught in courses university, medical and pharmaceutical colleges.From his blog The list of shame , associated with Naukas, one of the largest online platforms science in Spanish, Frias realizes the pseudo -scientific qualifications who teach "many" universities Spanish. In this space already complained in 2010 that the University of Barcelona was teaching a master of homeopathy and, once they have retired, continues to show that this academic, along with the Autonomous University of Barcelona "and with the blessing of official Colleges of institution medical and nursing "imparts its dual master 's degree in naturopathic medicine and naturopathic nursing , which could also be canceled for next year progresses, because currently are not offering a new edition.

These latest, together with other well recently that the College of Physicians of Barcelona has decided to remove courses homeopathy (but keep the section of homeopaths members) "because there is no clinical evidence" are not sufficient reason for Fernando Frias think homeopathy's days in our society. "We can not say we're at the beginning of the end, because 200 years old would be a tall order, but we are facing a major setback from the point of view of consumers starting to realize that homeopathy does nothing, "he says.

In his view, that homeopathy has so much presence in society is due to the "powerful industry behind." Only then it explained that the European directive on medicinal ruled on the one hand that "should provide evidence of effectiveness and evidence that the product is effective and safe for consumers", but otherwise an exception with homeopathy was established "for the pressures from countries like France or Belgium where they have an important industry that moves a lot of money. "

So why can be sold homeopathic products in pharmacies? We wonder."For the Health Ministry turns a blind eye on their marketing , " answers. "A couple of years ago a draft that his ministry was unaware of how many products in a given category on the market was developed, which makes us think that not know whether they are safe or not , " he adds. "Although most often are products with zero or low concentrations, so they pose no danger ", this particular" activist "against the pseudoscience.

The greatest danger continues Fernando Frias, occurs when the drug is replaced "by this kind of remedies" and cites as anexample the case of Girona where police found the body of a child in a home whose parents had been trying theirasthma with homeopathy .

So all in all, the Alicante lawyer understands that the use of homeopathy "many times" due to situations of "despair, with deeply held beliefs."Beyond its similarities with religion, "that is," this blogger says will "at least tried to implement the idea that belief is questionable."

http://www.elmundo.es/comunidad-valenciana/2016/03/27/56f7a11c46163fd1308b4614.html

Documentary Highlights James Randi’s War on Fake Psychics Where magic meets the scientific method.

Glenn Garvin
March 25, 2016

"An Honest Liar"Independent Lens: An Honest Liar. PBS. Monday, March 28, 10 p.m.

There’s something bewitchingly charming—not to mention bold as brass—about a documentary that starts off a montage of its hero introducing himself to various TV audiences as "a liar, cheat, charlatan and fake." And neither An Honest Liar (airing as an episode of the PBS documentary series Independent Lens) nor its subject, magician-turned-debunker James Randi, will let you down.

Randi, once a master mind reader and escape artist, has for the past four decades mostly concentrated on exposing charlatan psychics and faith healers, including an epic scorched-earth campaign against Israeli mentalist Uri Geller. (Randi even refused to shake Geller's hand: "Do you really suppose Churchill and Hitler would shake hands?")

In An Honest Liar (which had a brief theatrical run in 2014 but remains mostly unseen outside the festival circuit), veteran documentarians Justin Weinstein and Tyler Measom follow the 88-year-old Randi through his multiple careers, starting with his schoolboy fascination with magician The Great Blackstone, who levitated his pretty assistant. (The zenith of Blackstone's career was in the 1940s, and he died 50 years ago, but Weinstein and Measom, who've done a masterful job of assembling archival footage, actually found an old film clip of the act.) It wasn't long before the teenaged Randi ran off with a traveling carnival and started his own magic act.

Yet Randall Zwinge, as he was still billed in those days, found success, a growing disquietude came along with it. Strangers stopped him on the street asking for tips on stocks or the fidelity of their fiances, even offering him money for his psychic counsel. Randi thought he was doing parlor tricks; the realization that "people really do believe in this nonsense" stunned and then appalled him.

He began centering his act more around his uncanny talents as an escape artist. Highlight: Slipping out of a straitjacket while dangling from a chain over Niagara Falls. But when he had to be hospitalized with two fractured vertebrae after a botched version of his trademark escape from a sealed milkcan filled with water (though he briefly returned from the hospital to advise the audience that "it's not something I would recommend you undertake as a hobby"), Randi became a fulltime debunker of psychic swindlers and frauds.

An Honest Liar includes a dizzying and hilarious array of Randi's TV appearances over the years, using magician stagecraft to expose psychokinetics and psychic surgery. He even downed a week's supply of homeopathic sleeping pills without cracking a yawn. The most heroic took place on The Tonight Show, whose host Johnny Carson—an amateur magician himself—was a Randi admirer.

Carson had consulted Randi in preparation for a visit from Uri Geller, whose ability to tell which one of 10 sealed film canisters contained a steel ball-bearing had wowed the Pentagon, wracked as it was with Strangelovian fears of a growing Ball-Bearing-Film-Canister Gap with the Soviets. Randi, who noted that Geller was always presented the canisters on a tray, which he slightly turned this way and that in apparent contemplation, advised Carson to glue the cans down: Geller was watching the tray for subtle movements that gave away which canister contained the ball-bearing.

The result: 20 minutes of dead air that ended in the frustrated Geller declaring that "I don't feel strong tonight." As marvelous as that was, it probably doesn't match Randi's Tonight Show appearance in which he played secret radio transmissions to a Los Angeles faith-healer's hidden earphone that enabled him to diagnose and then "cure" illnesses. Carson's blurted on-air reaction: "Oh, shit!" 

Randi didn't hustle all those years in the carnival without developing killer showmanship chops. (When I visited his home for a newspaper interview a couple of years ago, he randomly tossed off a little mind-reading trick—he somehow divined a word I picked out from the middle of a book that I chose from 4,000 or so possibilities—that left me utterly bedazzled.) And one of the things that makes An Honest Liar so entertaining is that it never loses sight of that fact. The film is full of endearingly cheesy stuff like footage from the 1950s TV show Cross-Canada Hit Parade, where the hostess sang "(You've Got) The Magic Touch" while Randi extricated himself from a straitjacket while hanging head-down over the stage. 

But, fun though Randi may be, he's got a serious purpose. As a fellow magician observes in An Honest Liar, he's suggesting that life is best lived as an extension of the scientific method—that while people may not always be rational, the world is, and anything that seems to run contrary to that principal should be challenged and questioned. And the corollary is those who seek to promulgate the irrational are charlatans and mountebanks. "It's okay to fool people as long as you're doing that to teach them a lesson, which will better their knowledge of how the real world works," argues Randi.

Sadly, for all the battles Randi has won in that campaign, he may be losing the war. Uri Geller, who in a sensible world would have vanished forever after the debacle on The Tonight Show, scarcely missed a beat in his career and even now can be found on the home-shopping channels, making a small mint off selling psychic-powering crystal jewelry. "Pick up the National Enquirer or any other paper and you'll find a billion psychics," he brags in An Honest Liar. "It's much bigger than ever." And you thought the presidential election was depressing.

Photo Credit: "An Honest Liar"

Contributing Editor Glenn Garvin is the author of Everybody Had His Own Gringo: The CIA and the Contras and (with Ana Rodriguez) Diary of a Survivor: Nineteen Years in a Cuban Women's Prison. He writes about television for the Miami Herald.

http://reason.com/archives/2016/03/25/documentary-highlights-james-randis-war

EYEWITNESS NEWS INVESTIGATES UNORTHODOX UNDERWORLD OF GENESIS II CHURCH

David Ono and Lisa Bartley
ABC7
March 01, 2016 

Vanuatu

Pseudoscience, conspiracy theories and potentially toxic chemicals being touted as a religious sacrament. That's what Eyewitness News found when we went undercover at a recent seminar held by the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing in Costa Mesa.

"That's why we wanted to do the church," Archbishop Mark Grenon told a room full of believers who'd each paid $450 to attend a seminar at the Ayres Hotel.

"Everybody start a church and do it from there. You can sell them anything! Tell them Jesus heals you while you drink this," Grenon said.

The Genesis II Church believes their sacrament, known as Miracle Mineral Solution or MMS, can cure virtually anything - from the common cold to cancer, autism and HIV.

"Yeah, I got people, we're curing people of major stuff just from that," Grenon told the crowd. "Just with the one drop an hour - from prostate cancer to brain cancer to autism."

The FDA, however, calls the so-called miracle treatment a "potent bleach" that can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and symptoms of severe dehydration.

WATCH: Man loses wife after she takes 'Miracle Mineral Solution'
The Miracle Mineral Solution bottles are shown in an undated photo.
Death in paradise

Doug Nash, a retired planetary geologist with NASA and former mayor of San Juan Capistrano, said he'd never heard of the Genesis II Church or MMS before his wife Sylvia Fink took it in August 2009.

"She tried it one time," Nash said. "And it caused her death in 12 hours."

Doug met Sylvia, a retired teacher from Mexico City, in early 2004. Doug was looking for a crew member to sail with him from Dana Point to Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. Sylvia answered the ad and soon the two fell in love.

"Things really clicked," Doug told Eyewitness News. "And eventually we got married."

The couple lived on and fell in love aboard Doug's sailboat, "Windcastle." For five years, they sailed from one exotic locale to the next -- Tahiti, Fiji, Tonga, Panama and New Zealand.

Doug said Sylvia made friends everywhere they went and especially loved to meet the local children.

"She was friendly, outgoing - just bursting with energy and enthusiasm," he said. "Everywhere we went, if music started up, she would immediately get up and dance."

In the summer of 2009, Doug and Sylvia sailed to Vanuatu, a small island nation in the South Pacific.

Sylvia was growing concerned about the threat of malaria at their next stop, the Solomon Islands. Doug said another couple sold Sylvia the MMS, claiming it could ward off malaria.

Doug said Sylvia mixed up the MMS according to instructions provided to her by the other couple.

"All of a sudden I heard her - 'yeck... that tastes awful.' When she swallowed it, she reacted to its terrible taste," Doug said. "Within 10 to 15 minutes, she was starting to tell me she didn't feel good. And from there, she got worse and worse in terms of nausea and vomiting and diarrhea."

Doug and Sylvia were in the middle of nowhere, anchored offshore from the tiny Vanuata island of Epi with no medical facility.

Initially, the couple was not overly concerned. Doug said the promotional material for MMS claimed that nausea and diarrhea meant that the MMS was working - they were supposedly signs that toxins were being flushed from the body.

"Hours went by and it didn't pass," Doug recalls. "I couldn't get any fluid into her. I knew dehydration was a danger."

Doug began looking through medical books he kept onboard the sailboat. "I realized this was all the symptoms of poisoning, toxic poisoning."

"I called for help. She was by that time really desperate," he added. "I put out a radio broadcast to all the boats, 'please, I need help, right away - severe medical.'"

Other sailors came on board and helped Doug perform CPR on Sylvia for nearly an hour. A nurse practitioner arrived and gave Sylvia a shot of adrenaline. But it was too late - Sylvia was gone.

"All of a sudden, and this is what haunts me, her eyes suddenly just flipped up like that," Doug explained to Eyewitness News. "I think that's the moment she died literally and she fell limp in my arms."

Sylvia's body was flown back to Port Vila, the capital city of Vanuatu, the next day. But it was two weeks before an autopsy could be performed. A pathologist had to fly into the island nation from Australia. In that time, Sylvia's body had been frozen and thawed at least one time, according to the autopsy report.

MMS on trial

The MMS Sylvia bought from the other sailors was manufactured by Daniel Smith of Spokane Washington and his company Project GreenLife.

Investigators with the FDA zeroed in on Smith after receiving a string of complaints from people who'd taken MMS.

Eyewitness News obtained those complaints which report serious reactions ranging from "unstoppable vomiting and diarrhea" to "life-threatening electrolyte abnormalities."

One unidentified person wrote, "the product called Miracle Mineral Supplement killed my mom."

Doug is one of the people who wrote to the FDA about MMS. Doug was contacted by the FDA in 2010, but investigators were ultimately unable to link Sylvia's death to MMS.

"The autopsy was inconclusive so we have not gone forward with this investigation looking at MMS as the cause of that death," said FDA Special Agent DaLi Borden in grand jury transcripts related to the indictment of Daniel Smith.

"I think the medical link was not proved due to a variety of circumstances, length of time till there was an autopsy, things like that," Borden told a grand jury in January 2013.

"They are selling bleach," said Benjamin Mizer, a principal deputy assistant general with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Although federal investigators could not link Sylvia's death to MMS, Mizer's team of prosecutors did go after Daniel Smith for illegally marketing MMS as a "miracle cure."

In October 2015, Smith was convicted and sentenced to more than four years in federal prison.

"MMS is not a cure," Mizer said. "They might as well be selling Clorox as a cure for cancer."

Daniel Smith is not a member of the church, but Genesis II supporters rallied support and raised money for Smith's legal defense.

MMS: Religious sacrament or snake oil?

Despite the FDA warning and the conviction of Daniel Smith, some believers still consider MMS their religious sacrament.

"We're (going to) stand up as a church," self-proclaimed Genesis II Archbishop Mark Grenon told attendees at the seminar held last month in Costa Mesa.

Eyewitness News cameras captured Grenon outlining a string of increasingly bizarre conspiracy theories:

Vaccines are part of an evil plan to reduce the world's population to half a billion.

Chemtrails are sinister poisons sprayed on us from the sky.

Those planes on 9/11? Holograms created by the government.

But the divine prophecy in the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing? MMS can cure virtually anything.

"Lung cancer, he wrote me, 'I coughed up a tumor,'" Grenon recounted of one man's story to the crowd. "The doctors were flabbergasted."

Before and after photos shown at the seminar purported to show miraculous healing, and not just in humans.

"What did you have on your dog, Ron?" Grenon asked one seminar attendee who claimed MMS cured his dog.

"There was a tumor on his adrenal gland," the man responded.

"Gone, right?" Grenon asked as the man nodded in agreement.

Sodium Chlorite, one of the main chemicals used in MMS, is typically used in industrial pesticides, wastewater treatment and hydraulic fracking.

"It is a poison," warns Mizer. "MMS yields a bleach product that should not be ingested, but could be used to clean your bathtub."

Still, Archbishop Mark Grenon insists that MMS is "not toxic, it's not dangerous at all."

Doug Nash, now a widower, disagrees.

"MMS killed my wife," he said. "I'll never forget her."

Got a tip? Email investigative producer lisa.bartley@abc.com.


http://abc7.com/news/abc7-investigates-unorthodox-underworld-of-genesis-ii-church/1225161/