Bay Area Skeptics Information Sheet - 1989 07

Magazine Overview

This issue of "BASIS", the newsletter of the Bay Area Skeptics, dated July 1989, is Volume 8, Number 7. Edited by Kent Harker, the newsletter focuses on critically examining claims of supernatural phenomena and alternative medicine.

Onward Christian Healers by Kent Harker

This article delves into the claims of supernatural healing, a topic long of interest to skeptics. Harker notes that religious societies often have healing rituals and stories of miraculous recovery, but typically resist scientific analysis. He recounts an acquaintance's insistence on the validity of Christian healing, spurred by a newspaper clipping about a San Francisco medical doctor who claimed clinical proof that prayer aided healing.

The article details the study "Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer [IP] in a Coronary Care Unit Population," published in the "Southern Medical Journal" (Vol. 81, No. 7, July 1988) by Dr. Randolph Byrd, MD. The study, conducted at San Francisco General Medical Center from August 1982 to May 1983, involved 393 patients (192 in the study group, 201 in the control group). Patients were randomly assigned to either the study group (receiving IP in addition to traditional care) or the control group (receiving only traditional therapies), with both staff and patients blinded to group membership. "Intercessors" were described as "born-again Christians" who prayed daily for patients in the study group.

Harker expresses skepticism about the study's conclusions, which suggested prayer led to more rapid improvement in six of twenty-six coronary conditions. He questions the specificity of these improvements and suggests that if the study were repeated, different conditions might show significance. He also raises theological questions, referencing New Testament passages where faith of the healed person is paramount. The article points out potential flaws in the protocol, such as the lack of monitoring for prayers offered by family and friends for control group patients, and the failure to consider the benefits of a large support group.

Specific conditions that showed statistically significant improvement in the study group included intubation/ventilation, antibiotics, cardiopulmonary arrest, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia. Harker notes that while the study group showed less need for intubation and antibiotics, two patients in the study group suffered cardiopulmonary arrest compared to seven in the control group. He questions the moral implications of such outcomes and the random assignment of patients.

The article also discusses other studies, including one where patients were aware of intercessory prayer, showing improvement, and another where patients were unaware, showing no significant difference. Harker suggests that intercessory prayer might work due to psychological factors rather than divine intervention, referencing the well-established placebo effect, which he believes Dr. Byrd did not adequately control for.

Knowing When Not to Believe the Unbelievable by Wallace Sampson, MD

This section critiques a "Nature" article titled "When To Believe the Unbelievable," which reported on a study by Benveniste and associates claiming to demonstrate the validity of homeopathy. The study involved dilutions of an antibody that supposedly affected basophil degranulation.

Sampson explains the principles of homeopathy: "like cures like" and dilution. He questions how a solution with no molecules can impart activity, noting that chemical laws suggest dilution reduces activity. The authors attributed the effect to water "remembering" the substance's quality after shaking.

The article highlights several issues with the Benveniste study: the results were not consistently reproducible across different dilutions or labs, suggesting random variation or error. Sampson speculates on possible explanations, including chance, systematic human error (like contamination or bias), or even deliberate faking. He notes that a subsequent experiment under strictly monitored controls by a "Nature" team yielded negative results.

Sampson concludes that the Benveniste study's claims are unreproducible and that homeopathy is more likely to worsen a patient's condition than to heal. He suggests that any perceived improvement from homeopathic solutions is probably due to the placebo effect or suggestion.

Caution: Psychics at Work by William Bennetta

This article by William Bennetta, an advisor to BAS and research associate at the Steinhart Aquarium, critiques the practice of psychics seeking respectability by associating with reputable institutions. It focuses on Robert Willhite, a fortune-teller who allegedly exploited the California Academy of Sciences.

Willhite, who uses rune-stone readings, was reportedly recommended to the Academy's Traditional Arts schedule by "Deja Vu Hotline," a psychic referral service. The article details how Willhite conducted a public fortune-telling session at the Academy, using it to promote his claims of clairvoyant powers and to advertise a commercial organization that steers clients to psychics. Bennetta expresses embarrassment for the Academy and warns other institutions to conduct careful evaluations.

The article describes Deja Vu Hotline as part of a network of enterprises linked to the Berkeley Psychic Institute and the Church of Divine Man, run by Lewis S. Bostwick and Susan Hull Bostwick. Willhite's presentation at the Academy involved an "incoherent, quasi-historical talk" about magical beliefs and symbols, which Bennetta found promotional and aimed at validating soothsaying.

Bennetta notes that while the Academy's Traditional Arts program usually evaluates participants for their cultural significance, this process evidently failed with Willhite. He suggests that the name "Deja Vu Hotline" itself should have been a warning. The article implies that Willhite's performance was an attempt to legitimize divination and psychic practices.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue of "BASIS" is the critical examination of pseudoscientific claims and alternative healing practices. The newsletter adopts a strongly skeptical stance, rigorously questioning the methodology, reproducibility, and underlying logic of studies and claims related to intercessory prayer, homeopathy, and psychic phenomena. The editorial stance is one of promoting scientific literacy and cautioning the public against unsubstantiated beliefs and the exploitation of reputable institutions by purveyors of the paranormal.

This issue of "BASIS", the monthly publication of Bay Area Skeptics from July 1989, focuses on critical analysis of pseudoscience, particularly in the realm of education and regulation. The primary content includes a multi-part article by William Bennetta examining the assessment of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) Graduate School and a report on legislative efforts in California concerning the regulation of educational institutions.

"Degrees of Folly: Part V" by William Bennetta

This installment of William Bennetta's article continues his critique of the California State Department of Education's Private Postsecondary Education Division (PPED) and its handling of the assessment of the ICR Graduate School (ICRGS). The ICRGS is described as an arm of the Institute for Creation Research, an organization disseminating "creation-science."

Bennetta details how a five-man committee, managed by PPED officer Roy Steeves, was formed to assess the ICRGS. He alleges that two members of this committee, G. Edwin Miller and George Howe, were "ringers" with close associations to the ICR, despite the Department's policy limiting such nominations. The committee's initial report was allegedly false and misleading, recommending approval of the ICRGS for master's degrees in science and science education. However, two legitimate committee members later revealed the truth, and the Department's chief, Bill Honig, initially refused approval.

Despite this, the Department later began negotiating with the ICR. Bennetta highlights Roy Steeves's memos, which appear to promote the ICR and its positions, even declaring ICR members as "scientists" and comparing their cosmology to that of Cal Tech. Steeves also dismissed dissenting opinions, such as those of committee member Stuart Hurlbert, and characterized objections to certifying creationism as science as a dispute between "theists and atheists."

Bennetta questions whether Steeves genuinely believed the ICR's claims, such as a universe only 6,000 years old or a "devolutionary theory" in modern biology.

The article also touches upon the Department's alleged "cover-up" to justify Steeves's conduct, including a refusal to answer mail from concerned individuals. An agreement was reached between the Department and the ICR's lawyer, Wendell Bird, which Bennetta describes as vague and lacking clear terms. Under this agreement, the ICR committed to revising its science courses to align with accredited schools, removing "creationist interpretations" from degree programs and confining them to peripheral activities. A new committee is to be dispatched to examine these revisions, with one member to be selected by the ICR.

Bennetta expresses skepticism about the feasibility of monitoring the ICR's compliance and notes that the program in science education, which received a "free ride" previously, will not be re-examined.

Sidebar: Cathy and Joey and S.B. 190

This section discusses S.B. 190, a bill proposed by State Senator Becky Morgan, aimed at reforming the regulation of unaccredited schools in California. The bill seeks to create a new agency to control these schools, removing this function from the Department of Education and abolishing the PPED.

The bill received approval from the Senate Education Committee and the Senate Appropriations Committee. However, opposition was led by Catherine Sizemore, lobbyist for the California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools, who argued against creating a new agency and suggested empowering the existing PPED.

Bennetta notes the irony of Sizemore's position, given her relationship with PPED director Joseph Barankin, suggesting a conflict of interest that may have contributed to the Department's inaction on reforming the PPED. He speculates that senators might view S.B. 190 as the only practical path to reform.

Other Content

The issue also includes a list of the BAS Board of Directors and BAS Advisors, featuring prominent figures in science, skepticism, and related fields. It concludes with information on how to obtain a sample copy of "BASIS" and copyright details for reprints.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are the critique of pseudoscience, particularly creationism, within educational institutions and the examination of regulatory processes and potential conflicts of interest within government bodies. The editorial stance is clearly skeptical, advocating for scientific rigor in education and transparency in regulatory oversight. The publication actively challenges what it perceives as the uncritical acceptance or promotion of unscientific claims by educational authorities.