Arrogance of ignorance 2

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

A New Low for SMA

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

"Should doctors check the daily horoscopes of their patients?"

(Posted on the Singgapore MD blog)

Lipstick on a Pig 4

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Lipstick on a Pig 3

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Lipstick on a Pig 2

Reading this letter to the ST Forum...

TCM practitioners not exempted from duty to provide proper medical care

WE REFER to Dr Ong Siew Chey's letter on Thursday ('Certifying TCM practitioners: It opened Pandora's box').

Although Western medicine is the mainstream health-care service in Singapore, traditional medicine services such as traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) remain popular and are increasingly gaining public acceptance.

The Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners Act was enacted to safeguard patients' interests and safety, and to ensure an acceptable standard of TCM practice is maintained.

Singapore does not have double standards regarding medical practice. Every professional group has different qualifications, training requirements and scope of practice. TCM practitioners, by virtue of their training and practice, are not the same as Western medical practitioners. In the same way, nurses, pharmacists and other health-care professionals are also different. Therefore, not all health-care professionals could be viewed in the same way.

China's health-care practices and regulatory frameworks are different from Singapore's due to its historical and political development. While we have taken reference from China in the way TCM is regulated here, we are also developing our brand of regulatory framework, as Singapore is one of the first countries outside of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan to regulate TCM.

We have much to learn and a long way to go, as the regulatory framework for TCM is still in the infancy stage compared to the regulatory framework for Western medicine. As a matter of fact, the current Singapore TCM regulatory framework has taken reference from the regulatory framework as set out in the Medical Registration Act and the Dentists Act, in particular, with regard to the disciplinary powers of the TCM Practitioners Board over TCM practitioners.

This is not a case where TCM practitioners enjoy any exemption from their obligation to provide proper and adequate medical care. If any TCM practitioner is found guilty of misconduct or improper behaviour, he will be dealt with by the TCM Practitioners Board.

We thank Dr Ong for his feedback, and welcome feedback and ideas from the TCM community, the health-care family and the public to make our TCM regulatory framework one of the best in the world.

Chuo-Ng Peck Hiang (Mrs)
Executive Secretary for Registrar
TCM Practitioners Board


reminded me of this post I wrote more than a year ago.

Now Mrs Chuo-Ng is factually correct in many of the statements she made: TCM is "popular and... increasingly gaining public acceptance", the TCM Registration Act is largely based on the same framework the Medical Registration Act and the Dentists Act, and TCM practitioners are subject to penalties if they are "found guilty of misconduct or improper behaviour".

But those points do not change the fundamental fact that TCM is a pseudoscience the theory and practice of which are not based on evidence, and that no amount of legislation or regulation is going to make it so. To want to "regulate" TCM before we can even demonstrate the existence of 'qi' is as ridiculous a notion as that of having a medium registry before we can proof that spirits or deities exist.

Lipstick on a Pig

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Standing up for the 'godless'

angry doc wasn't aware this special report (who reads newspapers these days anyway?), but thanks to this letter in the ST Forum, he is clued in:


You don't need faith to be good

THE Saturday Special report last week ('God wants youth') stated that religious groups were determined not to lose a generation to godlessness, especially now with youth gangs in the news.

It also noted that what is at stake is the potential of losing the youth to cynicism, violence and even fanaticism.

These remarks suggest a prejudice against those without any religious affiliation.

The last census in 2000 showed that roughly 15 per cent of Singaporeans did not have any religious affiliation.
The article essentially suggested that this group, 'the godless', are cynical and prone to violence.

As a society for non-believers, the Humanist Society (Singapore) disagrees.

The reality in societies everywhere is that there is no difference between non-believing youth and the religious youth in their propensity towards violence. There are actually higher levels of violence among those who identify themselves as 'religious' or 'faithful'.

As for cynicism, there is certainly no correlation between non-belief and a cynical attitude. Many non-believers are involved in the world around them, trying to make it a more humane, compassionate place.

The two largest charitable donations in the history of the world were by atheists: American investor Warren Buffett and his fellow American Bill Gates of Microsoft donated US$30 billion (S$39 billion) and US$11 billion respectively to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, a charitable organisation whose main goals are to enhance health care and reduce poverty worldwide.

I know of many non-believers, people who identify themselves as humanists, atheists and agnostics, who regularly donate to charity. Many also do volunteer work for humanitarian causes.

One does not need to have a religion to lead a good, happy and meaningful life and to have compassion for our fellow human beings.

Paul Tobin
President
Humanist Society (Singapore)


Now angry doc thought the statements:


"The reality in societies everywhere is that there is no difference between non-believing youth and the religious youth in their propensity towards violence. There are actually higher levels of violence among those who identify themselves as 'religious' or 'faithful'."


were contradictory, and so he went to look up the Humanist Society's webpage; sure enough the original letter submitted by Mr Tobin read (emphasis mine):


"The reality in societies around the world is that there is either no difference between non-believing youth and the religious youth in their propensity toward violence or there is actually higher levels of violence among those who identify themselves as "religious" or "faithful." [See, for instance, the studies cited in Michael Shermer’s book “The Science of Good and Evil” 2004 pp. 235-236]"


That made more sense...

If the Humanist Society sounds familiar to you (as it did to angry doc), it may be because you've read about them earlier in this news report; a bit of equal air-time, perhaps?

angry doc is ambivalent about the idea of a group that aims to shape our society based on humanist ideals ('ethical' and 'humane' aren't really angry doc's favourite words, you understand...), but he can see why some people feel the need for those without religious affiliation to come together to represent their interests - the fact that "community leaders" believe that the social problems such as gangsterism and dysfunctional families can be solved by making young people believe in the same gods as they do is a scary thought indeed.

angry doc will not be rushing to join the Humanist Society yet, but he certainly thinks it is an organisation to watch.

My Foot!

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Sense and Sensitivities

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Loss 4

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

A Taste for Your Own Medicine

(Posted on the Singapore MD blog)

Dr Tan, I presume?

Google is a wonderful thing.

This letter on the ST Forum today did not come as a surprise to angry doc:


Dispel concerns about complications after vaccinating kids

I REFER to Tuesday's report, 'Immunise infants early, specialists urge'.

I would like to ask child specialists how much adjuvants are given to children in the form of aluminium and mercury salts in vaccines, besides preservatives, over a two-year period, under the Ministry of Health (MOH) childhood immunisation programme.

Scientists have shown that aluminium and mercury are foreign to our biological system and do more harm than good. Does MOH have a register of all complications related to childhood vaccines given in Singapore? According to vaccine package inserts, these complications range from mild fever to severe convulsions and delayed eczema.

In a 2007 clinical study of 300 babies aged between nine and 12 months at five SingHealth polyclinics, what was the adverse complication rate and the severity, in terms of morbidity and mortality? Are these babies followed up long-term and for how long?

Mothers' concerns about autism and vaccination are real. The incidence of autism is reported to be rising in Singapore. This issue has not been thoroughly addressed as to its causation.

Tan Soon Kiam


Sounds familiar?

On a whim angry doc decided to google Mr Tan's name, and it turns out that 'Mr' Tan may in fact be 'Dr' Tan.

In fact, judging from the topic of his 'concern', he may be the same Dr Tan we encountered on this blog more than two years ago.

Dr Tan, as we can see from his letters, is no heavy metal fan. Readers may wish to google his name to find out for themselves why this is so.

What's in a name?

Fellow skeptic-blogger Singaporean Skeptic's post draws angry doc's attention to a study on Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) on ADHD being conducted at IMH.

angry doc is one of those people who routinely calls modern medicine 'western' medicine. He does so because he thinks it is a convention that reduces confusion; but Skeptic does make a good point - calling things by their proper name is important in promoting public understanding of science.

The fact is, even if "yi shen ke li" is shown to improve the behaviour of children with ADHD, it doesn't mean that TCM 'works', because giving a fixed formulation to all patients with a diagnosis that is made by 'western' doctors and which does not exist in TCM canon is not TCM.

Rather, it would mean that the active components in 'yi shen ke li' works. If we go on to identify that active component like Skeptic suggested, then it will mean that that active component works. If we continue to give children 'yi shen ke li' in its current form to children, then it would mean that this particular *herbal* medicine works. Either way, it would mean that modern or scientific medicine works, but not that TCM works.

Being conducted by IMH, angry doc is pretty sure the trial will be vigorous and have proper control group/s and be properly double or triple-blinded, although he suspects that the results will be like this one he looked at a while ago. He eagerly awaits them , and hopes that a 'negative' trial will also be reported with the same fanfare in the local media.

Medium Register

An interesting piece of news here:

Mediums to be regulated
Taoist Federation aims to weed out unskilled tang ki
By Yen Feng

THE Taoist Federation is taking steps to regulate spirit mediums here.

As early as next month, it will issue registration forms to the roughly 300 temples affiliated to it, so a register of mediums, or tang ki in Hokkien, can be set up.

Federation president Tan Thiam Lye told The Straits Times last week that this was the first in a series of steps to set apart those trained in channelling Chinese deities.

Registration is, however, voluntary for now. Down the road, licences may be issued.

More immediately, the federation will also produce a free manual to help devotees discern between skilled and unskilled mediums.

Saying the federation will take things 'one step at a time', he added: 'It is time for us to regulate them. We must not let the actions of a few bad apples lead to a misunderstanding of mediums and Taoism.'

angry doc will be very interested in finding our how to "discern between skilled and unskilled mediums". Maybe they can give a copy of the manual to Father Simon so he doesn't hold a "prayer session" for the wrong person in the future...

From somewhere else

Something better than what angry doc can come up with all by himself here.

Oh my God, the sued Simon!

You bastards!

Somewhere else

angry doc apologises for not posting for more than a week now.

He is not being lazy, and is in fact continuing the fight to promote scientific thinking over at Mr Wang's blog. Do drop by and have a read (here and here).

Any rumours of angry doc hoping to gain a cut from Mr Wang's advertising income are just vicious lies.

Fallacies and Misconceptions

(Posted on Singapore MD.)

Quote of the Week 3

"We don't talk about clinical trials. We're not reducing people to digits and statistics. We treat people as a whole. I don't think like most doctors do. I'm different."

- Dr Y. M. Wong, on stem cell "anti-aging" treatment