Author Topic: Full Text of a 'Scientific' paper supporting the "Hubbard sauna regimen"  (Read 1871 times)

Offline scicrit

  • Met Xenu
  • Posts: 28
The paper is: Drug residues store in the body following cessation of use: Impacts on neuroendocrine balance and behaviour – Use of the Hubbard sauna regimen to remove toxins and restore health published in Medical Hypotheses (2007) 68,868–879 by Marie Cecchini and Vincent LoPresti

I have made [a blog post here https://scicrit.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/a-scientific-paper-about-narconon-financed-by-the-church-of-scientology-and-written-by-scientologists-what-could-go-wrong/ about this insult to medical research. It was financed by 'The Foundation for Advancements in Science and Education' a Scientology front group, and its principal author (Marie Cecchini) is a Scientologist. These conflicts of interest are carefully concealed.

The journal Medical Hypotheses does not publish research, but provides a forum for speculative theories. The standard of evidence required is consequently extremely low.

While the paper looks almost respectable when you can only access the abstract, the full text reveals just how bad the reasoning and evidence presented really is, and needs to be more widely available.

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,859
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
The paper is: Drug residues store in the body following cessation of use: Impacts on neuroendocrine balance and behaviour – Use of the Hubbard sauna regimen to remove toxins and restore health published in Medical Hypotheses (2007) 68,868–879 by Marie Cecchini and Vincent LoPresti

I have made [a blog post here https://scicrit.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/a-scientific-paper-about-narconon-financed-by-the-church-of-scientology-and-written-by-scientologists-what-could-go-wrong/ about this insult to medical research. It was financed by 'The Foundation for Advancements in Science and Education' a Scientology front group, and its principal author (Marie Cecchini) is a Scientologist. These conflicts of interest are carefully concealed.

The journal Medical Hypotheses does not publish research, but provides a forum for speculative theories. The standard of evidence required is consequently extremely low.

While the paper looks almost respectable when you can only access the abstract, the full text reveals just how bad the reasoning and evidence presented really is, and needs to be more widely available.

Very good catch! However. this paper by  Marie Cecchini & Vincent LoPresti you refer to and linked copy of  was written in 2006, not 2007 as is noted on your blog. To make sure its clear which paper to are referring to, the title of the 2006 study is

Drug residues store in the body following cessation of use: Impacts on neuroendocrine balance and behavior – Use of the Hubbard sauna regimen to
remove toxins and restore health

Marie Cecchini  Vincent LoPresti
Foundation for Advancements in Science and Education, 4801 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 215, Los Angeles, CA 90010, USA
Received 11 August 2006; accepted 21 August 2006
ulFBiPOIc" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">https://mega.co.nz/#!EZJQ2JLL!qruGX1dTsbayh7kQ_G0s44CSUENXFIByFW ulFBiPOIc

They presented another different paper in 2007, which was later commented on by professionals ( and later responded to by the authors as well ).These documents can be found here

Chemosphere. 2007 Oct;69 (8) :1320-5.
Persistent organic pollutants in 9/11 world trade center rescue workers: reduction following detoxification.
Dahlgren J1, Cecchini M, Takhar H, Paepke O.
http://www.xenu-directory.net/documents/corporate/20060526-chemosphere-1-dahlgren.pdf

Professional comment by Edmund A.C. Crouch and Laura C. Green, of the Cambridge Environmental, Inc "

Comment on ‘‘Persistent organic pollutants in 9/11 world trade
center rescue workers: Reduction following detoxification’’
by James
Dahlgren, Marie Cecchini, Harpreet Takhar, and Olaf
Paepke [Chemosphere 00/00 (2007) 000–000]
Edmund A.C. Crouch, Laura C. Green
http://www.xenu-directory.net/documents/corporate/20070523-chemosphere-2-crouch.pdf

Reply
Comment of Edmund A.C. Crouch and Laura C. Green, on:
‘‘Persistent organic pollutants in 9/11 world trade center rescue
workers: Reduction following detoxification’’
by James Dahlgren,
Marie Cecchini, Harpreet Takhar, and Olaf Paepke
[Chemosphere 00/00 (2007) 000–000]
http://www.xenu-directory.net/documents/corporate/20070619-chemosphere-3-dahlgren.pdf

Keep up the good work exposing these people and front groups!
I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline scicrit

  • Met Xenu
  • Posts: 28
The paper in my post was, indeed, published in 2006 and I have edited the text accordingly.
I am, for some reason, not good at accurately copying numbers. Thanks for spotting it.

I came across the scathing comments on the  paper about the world trade center rescue workers (which were in the form of a letter to editor of the publishing journal) while googling the background to the paper in my post.

The author of this letter not only knowledgeably critiqued the science, but also pointed pointed out the conflict of interest that was sufficient, reason, on its own, for the journal to decline publication.

I can't help but wonder how many journals these papers were submitted to until they found one which had an off day, and did not do its research. "Chemosphere" redeemed itself by publishing the letter which you link to. "Medical Hypotheses" still does not seem to have noticed that it was used for propaganda purposes. 

Offline Mary_McConnell

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 2,859
    • Formerly Fooled Finally Free of The Deceptive Cult Called Scientology
The paper in my post was, indeed, published in 2006 and I have edited the text accordingly.
I am, for some reason, not good at accurately copying numbers. Thanks for spotting it.

I came across the scathing comments on the  paper about the world trade center rescue workers (which were in the form of a letter to editor of the publishing journal) while googling the background to the paper in my post.

The author of this letter not only knowledgeably critiqued the science, but also pointed pointed out the conflict of interest that was sufficient, reason, on its own, for the journal to decline publication.

I can't help but wonder how many journals these papers were submitted to until they found one which had an off day, and did not do its research. "Chemosphere" redeemed itself by publishing the letter which you link to. "Medical Hypotheses" still does not seem to have noticed that it was used for propaganda purposes.
Glad to be of assistance on that :)

I agree. I am surprised it was accepted over there because Elsevier publishes Medical Hypotheses. 

Quote
Elsevier is a world-leading provider of information solutions that enhance the performance of science, health, and technology professionals, empowering them to make better decisions, deliver better care, and sometimes make groundbreaking discoveries, that advance the boundaries of knowledge and human progress. Elsevier provides web-based, digital solutions — among them ScienceDirect, Scopus, Elsevier Research Intelligence, and ClinicalKey —  and publishes nearly 2,200 journals, including The Lancet and Cell, and over 25,000 book titles, including a number of iconic reference works.
http://www.elsevier.com/about/at-a-glance

Quote
Medical Hypotheses

Medical Hypotheses is a forum for ideas in medicine and related biomedical sciences. It will publish interesting and important theoretical papers that foster the diversity and debate upon which the scientific process thrives. The Aims and Scope of Medical Hypotheses are no different now from what was proposed by the founder of the journal, the late Dr David Horrobin. In his introduction to the first issue of the Journal, he asks 'what sorts of papers will be published in Medical Hypotheses? and goes on to answer 'Medical Hypotheses will publish papers which describe theories, ideas which have a great deal of observational support and some hypotheses where experimental support is yet fragmentary'. (Horrobin DF, 1975 Ideas in Biomedical Science: Reasons for the foundation of Medical Hypotheses. Medical Hypotheses Volume 1, Issue 1, January-February 1975, Pages 1-2.). Medical Hypotheses was therefore launched, and still exists today, to give novel, radical new ideas and speculations in medicine open-minded consideration, opening the field to radical hypotheses which would be rejected by most conventional journals. Papers in Medical Hypotheses take a standard scientific form in terms of style, structure and referencing. The journal therefore constitutes a bridge between cutting-edge theory and the mainstream of medical and scientific communication, which ideas must eventually enter if they are to be critiqued and tested against observations.

Submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the Editor and external reviewers to ensure their scientific merit. All reviewers will be fully aware of the Aims and Scope of the Journal and will be judging the premise, originality and plausibility of the hypotheses submitted.

Abstracting/indexing:
Medical Hypotheses is indexed and abstracted in: ADONIS, BIOSIS, Chemical Abstracts, Elsevier BIOBASE/Current Contents/Life Sciences, EMBASE Excerpta Medica, Index Medicus, Medical Documentation Service, Reference Update, Research Alert, Science Citation Index, SciSearch UMI (Microfilm), Russian Academy of Science.

Editor-in-Chief: Mehar S. Manku

View full editorial board http://www.journals.elsevier.com/medical-hypotheses/editorial-board
View:
    Journals & books
    Solutions
    Authors, editors & reviewers
    About Elsevier
    Community
    Store
Medical Hypotheses Supports Open Access Sample Issue

    Guide for Authors
    Submit Your Paper
    Track Your Paper
    Order Journal
    View Articles
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/medical-hypotheses/

Maybe the above could be of help in getting an answer?

It states it's a forum

I am a volunteer advocate for victims of the Narconon scam. I am a former scientologist. I post anonymously. Mary McConnell is my long time nom de plume. Feel free to contact me for assistance in righting the wrongs.

Offline ethercat

  • Global Moderator
  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 3,768
Slightly diverting from the subject of Narconon and the sauna detox, and onto discussion of research papers, I recently ran across some articles that address the subject of scientific (or not) journals, both the traditional where you have to pay for the research papers, and open access, where the research is free to access.

This is a hot topic amongst some academics, and no doubt there is more discussion to be found than these articles that I read. The comments were interesting as well, and I ended up spending a lot of time with this.  I forget what originally led me into this area of interest, but I recall many times being frustrated in the past at trying to find research that would refute Narconon's use of the sauna and vitamins for detox, bumping up against paywalls.  There is also a push to make the data used for papers open, since a paper's validity cannot be determined without the data used to produce it.

All of these articles are on The Guardian, but I'm sure there is discussion of this on blogs, sites, forums, mailing lists, etc.

The inexorable rise of open access scientific publishing:
A new study shows that the rise of open access publishing of academic research is faster than anyone had previously realised

Hiding your research behind a paywall is immoral
As a scientist your job is to bring new knowledge into the world. Hiding it behind a journal's paywall is unacceptable

Those who publish research behind paywalls are victims not perpetrators
Labelling scientists who publish in traditional journals as 'immoral' only hinders the cause of open access publishing

We cannot afford to keep research results locked away in ivory towers
Opening up British research may seem obvious, writes science minister David Willetts. But it is not just inertia that blocks this

Why open access isn't enough in itself
Paywalls may not be the only barrier we need to overcome if the public is to benefit from academic research, says Ellen Collins

Hundreds of open access journals accept fake science paper
Publishing hoax exposes 'wild west' world of open access journals and raises concerns about poor quality control

Apparently, The Guardian has been following this issue since 2004:
http://www.theguardian.com/science/open-access-scientific-publishing

Elsevier, in particular, has taken a lot of heat:
Scientists sign petition to boycott academic publisher Elsevier
Cost of Knowledge petition criticises 'exorbitantly high' price of Elsevier's scientific journals and the publisher's 'huge profits'

One of the arguments used by those who are opposed to open access publishing is that research published in open access journals is less subject to qualified scrutiny than those published in the paywall journals .  The fact that this Cecchini "research" was published in an Elsevier journal forum1 would tend to refute that argument.

Also, as a side note, this was one of Aaron Swartz's pet topics, and the one that ultimately led to his untimely and unfortunate death.


1 "forum" does not always mean an online software forum like this, a discussion board, however the "forum" this site refers to appears to be a "closed door" forum,  not one the general public is invited to partake of.
« Last Edit: January 17, 2015, 12:00 by ethercat »
   Narconon Reviews
   Independent Reviews of the Narconon Drug Rehab Programs
   Answers to Frequently Asked But Seldom Answered Questions