Nov
29
The scientific method
Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment
A diabetic friend of mine rejected the advice proffered in a book on health that I lent to him. His argument was that no trust could be put into advice from the single author. I assumed I knew what he meant, but on reflection, I am not so sure. Did he mean that only books with multiple authors had legitimacy? Or did he mean that the man was not affiliated to a medical organisation?
I assume the latter. Barry Groves was the author of the book (’Trick and treat’), and essentially from chemist to self financed researcher into nutrition and health. But my friend missed the salient points were that this man was not only free from the influence of the medical powers, but that the book was the result of no less than 26 years of full time research into health and nutrition research. A meta research that precised decades of scienitific research by others.
The only way in which I feel that this impressive position of authority was that Barry was always looking to research that endorsed his own personal nutritional approach.
However, it is well established that bias blights a large percentage of scientific research. To suppress the human instinct to ‘find what weare looking for’ is a hard task indeed.
But let’s step right back.
The scientific method is held in an almost sacred esteem. It is de rigour in the West. But a more practical and holistic view of the World dominates in the East of course. And Worldwide, there is also the additional matter of empirical result. All approaches have pros and cons, but I want to focus on the cons of the Western view first, by way of an example.
Consider the testing of drugs. The highest level of the scientific testing is to perform a double blind, placebo controlled study, where both the testers and the subjects are unaware of who is receiving the drug and who the placebo (sugar pill). For a drug to be approved for marketing, it must outperform the placebo. More often than not, the drug will be effective to varying degrees in a number of subjects, the placebo less so, and those who took no pill, there were some smaller improvement of symptoms.
But the whole point is that it is all a matter of degree. The approved drug will undoubtably not have worked at all for some of the subjects. The approval is also subject to some observation of side effects, but they are not the main focus. And often, side effects only manifest themselves after sustained consumption of a drug, often beyond the time period of a trial.
The net effect is that for some people, the approved drug will not only fail to help their condition, but will also cause unwanted side effects. The approval is essentially a statistical one. And this is a key flaw in the use of the scientific method for testing drugs. A single tick for approval for 100% of people when that drug was not proven effective for 100% of subjects.
And the key point I want to make is that just as Barry Groves was giving the viewpoint of one person, when you take a drug, you too are only one person. No matter how large the percentage efficacy of a drug, if you are in the wrong percentage, you will become more ill.
The double blind testing method helps you not one jot if the drug does not work for you. Yet we tend to blindly accept the one-size-fits-all advice we get from the medical industry.
The frailty of it all is actual quite funny on one sense - a New Scientific article revealed that one group of experimenters discovered that the administrationof morphine to patients in pain had no effect if the patient was unaware of the administration of the drug. They make a strong case that the double blind test method even more fundamentally flawed. There should be an additional group of subjects who receive a drug unknowingly (in their food or drink). How many drugs only ever got approval because the placebo effect was making the drug work by the power of the mind?
I talked with a district nurse of some decades experience yesterday. She confirmed something odd that I had read a while ago. That for some people, morphine fails to kill pain, and induces a state of agitation instead. Yet morphine would sail through scientific testing because of its high percentage efficacy. You just don’t want to be the one who gets agitated.
One final point, on the emprical method. The method that is so universally dismissed as being too anecdotal to be valid. Yet the whole point is that it has a similar weight of statistical vailidity to the scientific method. But it also has a much bigger weight of support in that it is often an assessment of a method over years and decades. Nutrionists giving food advice to thousands of patients over many years build up a huge amount of empirical knowledge, tweaking their methods to suit the reality of the feedback they ge. Often, they conclude that certain individuals require highly specific treatment. And adjust their observations and subsequent advice accordingly. Compare with double blind testing, which leaves marginal cases as mere statistics.
In conclusion, years of practical experience has a higher real World value than a short lived double blind test.
Nov
21
Football
Filed Under Life, Psychology | 1 Comment
In order to attempt to resolve 15 years of tension headaches, in which I have tried many routes to health, I have at last decided to undergo psychotherapy. I deferred partly because of the associated (but unwarranted) stigma, partly because the NHS denied me this route when I tried a number of times (claiming it inappropriate for headaches), but also because it is not cheap, especially when you are not earning much money. Not earning much money because of tension headaches.
The dialogue between myself and the excellent therapist is a private matter. But one underlying theme that emerges is that my lack of self esteem manifests itself as a prennial tendency to apologise for myself. So, naturally, I am trying to remedy this negative stance. To amazing effect yesterday and today.
Mid afternoon, I decided to play football, in spite of pouring rain. And in spite of not feeling physically so well. I ignored my physical plight, and focused on enjoying the run out and general exercise. But I set out to stand up for myself when players took the p**s out of me, as they tend to do. And also, not to apologise so much when I make mistakes.
I did quite well on these, but still maintain it appropriate to apologise when I make a bad pass, as it lets the team down.
But what happened in the game was a total, stunning surprise. I am still overawed by it all. But I have to explain some background before I can reveal precisely what.
I am 52 and 3/4 years old. I play on the right wing, and characteristically describe myself as a poor footballer, with some ability at crossing the ball. I play a simple game, where I play wide, in space to receive and then pass the ball. I rarely succeed in tackles, and very very rarely dribble with the ball, lacking confidence, and ability.
My mind focused on avoiding criticism, and minimising apologies, I set about the game. Early on, I received the ball with a player in front of me. Nornally, I would pass the ball swiftly. Or lose it. There would be a certain urgency and often panic. But this time, I played calmly, waited for my opponent to make a move, and I flicked the ball past him.
Sure, I have done this before, but I did this maybe a dozen times. More than I have done the whole year in all probability. Of course, it did not always work, but I did not let it affect my self esteem. I continued to try, relishing the game opening out before me. New possibilities were presenting themselves. I nutmegged my friend Steve. And all 5 corners I took were spot on.
It slowly dawned on me that this is not how I normally play. You know, it never ceases to amaze me how profoundly different changes in how we feel can take sooo long to reach our conscious awareness.
I was still apologising for mistakes, but I was now aware not only that others were too, and that every other player on the pitch (apart from Jumbo) were making mistakes. This was a new level of awareness. I was actually seeing reality.
For years now, my belief that I am not a good player has made me play within myself. Excruciatingly so. And this belief has also blinded me to this reality that I am not so different from those around me. Mistakes are rife in all of us. (Except Jumbo. But twice, I tackled him successfully).
I also noted that one player I admire failed to pass to me in space on a number of occasions, often losing the ball. He admitted this afterwards when I questioned him.
Now you are not me, and you may be mildly interested in this little story. To me, it is stunningly profound. To you, it should be also. It shows that a belief can become self fulfilling even when it works against you. And for not just days or week, but years and years! My belief blinded me to any reality that might contradict it. If this is the case, how many other beliefs do you and I hold that work against us?
If you want to read about a man who studied the staggering stubbornness of our habits, in spite of the fact that they often work against us, then F. M. Alexander is your man. He introduced the Alexander technique to the World.
I can cite another example. My sister is a very capable and well respected secondary school Maths teacher. Yet when 20, she failed Maths at Uni. And in another Uni failed again. I recently learned that because I had gained a 2-1 degree in a Maths based subject, my poor sister had a chip on her shoulder, believing herself to be inferior to me. Not just in Maths, but in the intellectual sense, I feel (but not linguistically, I should add).
This sorry plight persisted until about 3 years ago, when she enrolled in an OU Maths degree. She laboured through much of the material, but unlike at Uni, she could work at her own pace, and get to grips with concepts that had blocked her progress in the past. She not only got distinctions on many assignments, but she was awarded a 1st class honours degree.
The bouyancy in her self belief this generated has rarely deserted her, and I am so pleased at how she has grown in stature. Her former struggles, couplwed with her naturally empathic personality makes her a very special teacher. But how sad that 20 years should pass in a humbled state, sustained by a belief that was based on a distorted view of her abilities.
But the point is, it takes some significant action to make the mindset change to reverse the self-punishing habit. F.M.Alexander spent many months and years determining this. His work was related to how we hold our bodies. But the principle applies equally to our mental habits.
And one final example. I was marginalised in woodwork classes at school. I was slow and missed out on any sense of achievement. In my 30’s I discovered that I was actually very capable at woodwork. But only at my own pace and in my own way. (See www.neilmoffatt.co.uk).
Nov
9
For reasons that totally elude me, I am currently struggling with up to 6 days a week of variable mixtures of headache, excessive tiredness, anxiety and low blood sugar symptoms. And a sore throat.
If this is, as it should be, an alien cocktail of ailments, then just appreciate that fact.
Today, after the initial and inevitable waking headache unexpectedly faded away, I was left with a surge of energy and a clarity of thought that was hugely empowering. So I set about making the most of this with a long day of work.
Now you might thnik that I would necessarily be most happy to have recovered my health. Indeed, not so much recover as over-recover - I felt massively energsied - work was effortless.
But days like this, by nature of their rarity, are tinged with some negative aspects. First, that the comedown that my brain most likely has in store for me tomorrow is, by contrast, deeply frustrating. True, sometimes I get 2 good days in a row. But essentially, I know of no mechanism for sustaining today into tomorrow - and I have tried many many methods of doing so.
So what happens, as it did today, is that I end up in a manic rush, trying to catch up on all the complex, involved jobs that my brain is simply incapable of tackling on bad head days. There is a great sense of accomplishment, but also a bitterness that I have little choice - use my functioning brain now or wait another week or so for the next similar day.
At 10 am this morning, builders started work next door, making a hell of a din, and thereby making concentration tough. And also frustrating - I asked my neighbour how long it would last (should I go out and get a coffee), but when I start to explain that it is a ‘good head’ day for me, I get the inevitable blank stare. It means nothing to Bob, my neighbour and a real gentleman, and nor should it. But every fibre of my being was wanting to say how sacrosanct a day like this is and could he get the builders to do the work tomorrow.
Of course, I said no such thing, and fortunately, the noise abated at about 3pm.
I is 5:30 pm now, and I am taking a break to get this off my mind. I also know that I probably should meditate to calm my manic state down. But the torture of 6 straight days of bad head makes today an oasis, and it is terribly tempting to work like a nutter to squeeze all I can from my brain.
You see, not only is my head clear, but I mostly suffer not one jot of fatigue, working 10 or so hours. What is it about 15 years of tension headaches and a myriad ofrelated symptoms that can temporarily go into complete abeyance like this? The implication is that I should be able to switch off my headaches on an onging basis. But how on earth do I do that?
Nov
8
Social interaction
Filed Under Life, Psychology | 2 Comments
Why is it that we humans have such a fragile capacity for sustaining relationships? Why is it that a difference in how a toothpaste tube is squeezed can undermine a marriage? Why do we look for the ‘perfect’ partner? Why, indeed, when we ourselves are far from perfect?
But why have we evolved to be so fussy in our social demands? To do and say the right things in company all the time is terribly stressful and demanding. Sure, when at home with our spouse, we let our hair down, and the barriers are lowered. But even then, there are a clear set of rules we must follow, or we suffer negative emotions from our partner.
But what purpose do all these rules achieve?
I suspect that the multiplicity is a consequence of how much we differ. But why should you or I get quite so upset and then alienated by someone, who, for example, says the wrong thing in chat with friends? Or someone who breaks the silence at a meal with an audible fart? Why are we so fussy? Why do we get affected so?
Maybe because the effort to accommodate the diversity of people we meet requires a great effort of flexibility, and that if we see someone else not putting in that effort, we feel hard done by. Much like if we dilligently signal at every junction in our car, or strictly obey the speed limit, only for us to encounter others not hampered by these rules - we feel indignanant the lack of equity.
The divisive matter of toothpaste squeezing is merely a sense of loss of control - we want others to behave as we behave, and for the control we have on our difficult lives not to be compromised every day as it is when someone else squeezes the toothpaste tube in the wrong part. We strive to maximise the way the World goes our way, and minimise the compromises on that, needed to suit social harmony. When it is our nearest and dearest who extends the compromise, then we feel particularly hard done by.
I am merely pondering possibilities here. If you, the reader, have any answers, I would be keen to hear.
Nov
7
Heightened sensitivity
Filed Under Life | Leave a Comment
For various reasons, I have taken no holiday - no substantial break from routone - for 18 months now. At the same time, I have been throwing myself too deeply into the research and writing of 2 more books. Alas, as is my tendency, it seems, I have been narrowing and restricting myself to an ever more limited set of activities and routines.
Concurrent with this, and likely to be a subconscious reaction, my headaches, sleep disturbances, tiredness, and now bouts of unsettling anxiety have been growing, and taking over my momentum of my days and weeks.
Yet, in stark and utter contrast with this rollercoaster of draining existance, I have experienced an occasional oasis of relief. Yesterday, it happened after I took refuge from routine at the cinema. The film (’The fantastic mr fox’) was anarchic and itself a welcome relief from normal cinematic fare, was a delight, releasing me from the grip of habits. To the point where, rather than take the route back home, I deviated towards the nearly opened St Davids 2 centre in town. A shopping mall that took my breath away.
I revelled in the colours. Stopping when all around remained caught in their hectic journeys.
After a coffee and further scan, I set off home, choosing an alternate route. It was when I reached a main road crossing that I was taken away with the imagery before me. It was dark, the road wet, and my eyes were bombarded by a velvety rich blackness, sprinkled with the bright lights of the cars racing past.
As happened a few months ago, my senses were heightened. To the point where I felt supremely relaxed, and rooted to the spot, in awe like a child at the vista before me. A humble road, but not in my eyes. Everything was as deeply rich and beautiful, and I suspect made so in contrast to the intense routine I had subjected myself to for so long. Here were no computer graphics, but something more profound. I cannot convey what I felt. It was as if I was seeing for the first time.
Apart from a little softness in my focusing (again as a result of too much time absorbed in a PC screen or a book), I could not imagine a greater clarity of vision. The dynamic range and sweet intensity of colours set against the deep blackbackground, made any man made simulation feel like a thin, false idol.
Tonight, the same sweet intensity happened whilst I made a rare visit to a restaurant to eat out. As I sat and waited, I was as absorbed in the colours and decor as if I was elsewhere, at an art gallery. But I had no need of such a location - I was again revelling in the colours and shapes around me. It is somewhat difficult for me to explain all this. It is only he third time it has happend. I have not ’seen’ in this way since a child, and the contrast to the adour of a day long headacheis immense, and equally beyond description.
We fail to explain because the listener or reader can only undsretand if he can share the experience.
I still feel that I am being drawn out of my fog of ailments in this way as a reminder of what I should be doing with my life - embracing its richness. Yet when I fail to do this embracing, I am punished with ailments that kill my motivation to embrace.
This push and pull may be trying to achieve something, and I shall certainly monitor these messages. Or my interpretation or them.
One final thing. I left the restaurant sleepily relaxed. Yet I had been coerced into ordering food I was not sure I wanted (but which tasted great), and was rushed to finish too prematurely, as if the restuarant was bereft of spare seats. Yet I merely observed these things and relaxed naturally. This is quite rare for me.
To accept without judgement was the key. And maybe I was so spellbound by my heightened sense that such shortcomings of service were of minor importance. Underlying these periods of heightened senses, I was devoid of fear. When trying to work out what I should say or do in the restaurant (so long has it been since I visited one) I spoke and observed without judgement or fear of social faux pas.
This is a delightful state of mind, for we spend vast amounts of time tip-toeing around social demands invisibly placed on us by others.