FSM News and Articles
TGA lists first AUST L(A) herbal product, but where’s the evidence?: The TGA has listed the first herbal product under the AUST L(A) listing – a listing where consumers are assured the TGA has assessed the product’s health claims and found them supported by scientific evidence. Caruso’s Prostate EZE Max is a mixture of herbal extracts and is indicated to reduce night-time urinary frequency – but is this claim supported by evidence?* Here, FSM’s Ken Harvey and John Dwyer assessed the available evidence on Caruso’s Prostate EZE Max.
*Spoiler alert: No.
FSM Friends’ News and Articles
Integrative Neurology – More bait and switch: “The definition of integrative medicine is not what it is actually about, it’s just the branding designed to gain entry into mainstream medicine. It is the Trojan Horse. What spills out of that horse, however, is the real purpose of alt med – an eclectic collection of pseudoscience and magic-based treatments. The real purpose of the alt med/complementary/integrative brand is to eliminate the science-based standard of care in medicine, or at least carve out an exception, so that a variety of treatments previously considered to be health fraud can flourish.”
SEE IT: Ohio nurse hilariously fails to prove COVID vaccine makes people magnetic, key falls from her neck: Apparently this actually needs to be said, but vaccines DO NOT make you magnetic.
Do vegan diets make kids shorter and weaker? Can a vegan diet provide a growing child with the nutrition they need? A recent study found that children on vegan diets had a healthier cardiovascular risk profile, and generally lower fat mass than omnivorous children. However, vegetarian and vegan children were more likely to have nutrient deficiencies and vegan children in particular were shorter and had lower bone mineral content. Generally, these deficiencies can all be supplemented or prevented through dietary choices. If you are considering a vegetarian or vegan diet for your children, consulting with a dietician is recommended.
The “it’s banned in Europe” fallacy: The “But it’s been banned in Europe!” argument has been commonly applied to issues ranging from chemicals and pesticides to food additives and pharmaceuticals. Most recently it has been used to add to anti-vaccine narratives (despite the fact that no vaccine was ‘banned’). The first thing one has to understand is that many of these ‘banned in Europe’ arguments are based on decisions made through political processes rather than from scientific authorities. This makes it very similar to the fallacy of ‘science by court case’. This is also interesting in that such arguers tend to engage in cherry picking the experts and authorities that they are willing to listen to. One can be sure that if that particular authority had made a different decision, suddenly the arguer would consider them not worth listening to. In general one should base their arguments on the quality of the evidence behind a decision, not on the source of it.