Media woo merchants just don't get it


Do dietary deficiencies of magnesium or vitamin B6 cause Tourette's syndrome? 

Er, no.

If a production company decides they're going to make a program looking into treating Tourette's with magnesium and B6 will the advice that it's all nonsense put them off making the program? 

Er, no. 

Apparently the program is called The Food Hospital. I can't bear to look at the link to it because I know I'd only get upset. 

Somebody from there emailed me out of the blue to ask my opinion and I gave it to her. Turned out a bunch of other experts told her the same thing as me. Has that put off her making the program? (See above if you can't guess the answer.)

I spend much of my working life persuading people with severe mental illness to keep taking their medication and to stop smoking. It is really, really unhelpful for me to have popular programs on popular channels raising the possibility that the correct treatment for mental illness might be a bit of extra magnesium.

Before leaving this topic I cannot resist drawing your attention to one of only four papers in the whole of PubMed which even mention Tourette's and magnesium in the same breath. It's here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12424821. The title is "Hypothalamic digoxin deficiency in obsessive compulsive disorder and la Tourette's syndrome."  And if you're not already baffled by the concept of a hypothalamus that secretes digoxin (!) I recommend you check out the abstract and see if there is one single sentence that anybody who'd been to medical school could make any sense of at all. It truly reads like it's been automatically generated by one of those computer programs which writes modern rubbish poetry.


Anyhow, the whole shameful email thread is reproduced below. What can you do?


Hi.

I actually disagree strongly with you and I think that this kind of media activity is extremely damaging to the interests of medical science and hence indirectly patients. There is in fact a lot of harm associated with this sort of thing. It's one example among many of the way ignorant and misguided media professionals do damage without even realising it.

The honourable thing for you to do would be to NOT MAKE THE PROGRAM but I know that's never going to happen so I'll just leave it.

Regards

- Dave Curtis

From: Sue Edwards [mailto:Sue.Edwards@betty.co.uk]
Sent: 01 August 2012 16:43
To: Curtis David (EAST LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST)
Subject: RE: C4 expert Tourette's Syndrome

Dear Prof Curtis

Thank you so much for your reply. Really helpful.

Just so you know, I’ve spoken to a handful of Tourette’s specialists all of whom say a similar thing to yourself – that the study is small and poor. However, if we qualify this in the programme there is ‘no harm trying’.

It’s clear that Tourette’s is a very hard condition to trial, basically because the symptoms seems to wax and wane in severity naturally anyway so very difficult.

Having said all of this, I think C4 think it’s an interesting condition and the mechanistic concept is interesting to explore – we’ll see if it makes any difference and qualify it by saying that it could just be placebo effect anyway.

Thanks again

Sue

From: Curtis David (EAST LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST) [mailto:davidcurtis@nhs.net]
Sent: 01 August 2012 00:26
To: Sue Edwards
Subject: RE: C4 expert Tourette's Syndrome

Hi.

I'm not an expert in Tourette's but I do have the following comments.

I don't think "jumping up and down" is a good example of the kind of tic you get in Tourette's.

Your document does not seem to mention the most striking and specific feature of Tourette's - coprolalia and copropraxia (making obscene utterances and gestures).

You seem to be merging with some vague notion of hyperactivity and misbehaviour. This is not Tourette's.

I'm afraid the diet-related stuff you're referring to is absolute, unmitigated, unscientific nonsense. What a pile of crap! The stupid theories about magnesium and B6 don't at all mesh with the kind of motor disorders one sees in Tourette's syndrome. The "scientific" paper you cite is example of the worst kind of research imaginable - an open, unblinded study of a bunch of children who most likely don't have Tourette's in the first place. Look where it's published. Some crappy journal that nobody has ever heard of. Do you think you can find one decent journal that gives the time of day to any of this nonsense? Have a look on PubMed. There's 4,000 publications on Tourette's syndrome and only two on B6 - the two you mention. There's three on magnesium but one of those is from India based on 15 subjects and absolutely nonsensical and seems to include the notion that digoxin, a medication used to treat heart failure, occurs naturally in the brain. The first paper came out in 2002 and as people are desperate to find better treatments if there was anything at all in this there'd be more published by now.

If you go ahead with this project you will be producing an example of the very worst kind of "science" "journalism". I don't expect me writing this will stop you because you probably have too much invested already but you asked my opinion and this is it.

Regards

- Dave Curtis


--
Professor David Curtis MD MD PhD FRCPsych
Consultant and Honorary Professor in Psychiatry
East London NHS Foundation Trust
Glasshouse Fields Centre
68 Glasshouse Fields
London  E1W 3AB
020 7791 5207

Please use this email address for Trust and clinical communications:

davidcurtis@nhs.net

DO NOT SEND CONFIDENTIAL AND IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION TO THIS ADDRESS! EMAIL BETWEEN TRUST AND NHS.NET ADDRESSES IS NOT SECURE!

ANY TRUST EMAIL CONTAINING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION SHOULD BE SENT TO MY SECRETARY:

sheila.laane@eastlondon.nhs.uk




From: Sue Edwards [mailto:Sue.Edwards@betty.co.uk]
Sent: 31 July 2012 19:25
To: Curtis David (EAST LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST)
Subject: C4 expert Tourette's Syndrome

Dear Prof. Curtis

I have been recommended to get in touch with you; I hope you might be able to assist? I am working on the second C4 series of The Food Hospital  - it looks at how diet can help improve a whole host of conditions. One condition we are keen to delve into is Tourette’s Syndrome which I know you specialise in.  

I have read some research that has found some improvements in symptoms by adjusting diet. Specifically - by supplementing with magnesium and B6.

Would you mind reading our document (attached) and checking whether our approach is reasonable? I would highly value any of your comments/corrections as I am obviously no expert.

I feel that it is very important that C4 presents factual information to the public – your input would be an invaluable service in this regard.  

I’m afraid we are up against a very tight deadline. Is there any chance you would you be able to come back to me by the end of the week with any information/corrections/suggestions? We are due to film with this patient next week.  

Or, if you feel this is not your area would you be able to steer me towards someone you think might be able to help?

Thank you, I really appreciate your time.

Kind Regards

Sue


sue edwards
science producer
betty
the heal's building
8 alfred mews
w1t 7aa
t: 0207 290 0533
f: 0207 290 0679
sue.edwards@betty.co.uk


********************************************************************************************************************

This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the
sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it.
Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents:
to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

Thank you for your co-operation.

NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland
NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHSmail and GSi recipients
NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be accessed anywhere

********************************************************************************************************************

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nailing Hunt's lies

Here is the soundbite which Hunt has been repeating ad nauseam: "And at the moment we have an NHS where if you have a stroke at the weekends, you're 20% more likely to die. That can't be acceptable." Sounds quite impressive? I tweeted him to ask for evidence and got no reply so I decided to look for my own. It wasn't hard to find. I'll deal with the best and most recent example. The headline finding from this paper is that patients admitted at weekends with a stroke diagnosis have an increased 7-day mortality of 19%, apparently just as Hunt claims: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4487251/ The 7-day mortality for week-end admissions is 12.9% and for week-day admissions is 11.1% and if you factor in comorbidities etc. this gives you an adjusted mortality odds ratio of 1.19. Just as Hunt says. But let's look more closely. At some numbers buried in the text of the paper and not even given a p value, even though they are probably the most st
Read more

Sex and gender

This post is just here because I find myself having to make the same arguments again and again on twitter so in future I'm just going to link to this. Do I know what I'm talking about? I was a psychiatrist in the National Health Service for thirty years. That means I qualified as a medical doctor and then had post-graduate training, which naturally included some material on human development and sex and gender. I also have two doctoral degrees in human genetics, an MD and a PhD, and have been an author on hundreds of peer-reviewed papers, mostly on human genetics. Because of my research in genetics I am an Honorary Professor at two different London universities. My bio is here: http://www.davecurtis.net/dcurtis.html and the publications can be viewed here: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?hl=en&user=Vrr4Ig0AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate Do I do research in sexual development in humans? No. Do I understand it? Yes. I've read the stuff that
Read more

SITUATIONAL JUDGEMENT TEST - example ranking question

Example Ranking Question You are in charge of a large national organisation responsible for assessing the abilities of all the country's newly qualified doctors and matching them to appropriate employment. Shortly before distributing the results and final allocations you become aware that there is a problem with the marking system which you have outsourced. Rank in order the following actions in response to this situation (1= Most appropriate; 5= Least appropriate) A. Cross your fingers and hope it will all be OK. Probably nobody will mind too much. B.  Send out the incorrect marks and allocations then follow with an email saying you will get medical schools to check all the papers and have another go at it. C.  As above but attempt to shift some of the blame onto one of the candidates by implying that their smudgy pencil confused the marking machine so really it's all their fault. D.  Admit that things may not have been perfect but undertake to try to do better in fut
Read more

How to be a dualist

How to be a dualist David Curtis UCL Genetics Institute, University College London Centre for Psychiatry, Queen Mary University of London d.curtis@ucl.ac.uk   Is dualism really that bad? One of my reasons for writing this is that people seem to think it’s not OK to be a dualist. There’s this notion that dualism is somehow a thoroughly disreputable position. People go “Ah but that’s dualist” or say “Cartesian dualism” as a euphemism for “nonsense”. What I’m going to claim here is that dualism is in fact intellectually quite respectable and defensible, as long as you do it right. Maybe you still won’t tell other people that you’re a dualist but at least you might feel a bit better about yourself. Where to draw the line Saying “mind-body dualism” is risky because the word “mind” is often used to refer to mental activities such as thinking, judging and remembering. It’s perfectly obvious that these are activities of the brain and if we start trying to split them off from
Read more

Why GWAS's are evil

OK, yes, I know that genome-wide association studies have identified some important genetic effects but there are some important downsides too. I truthfully do not know whether the benefits have outweighed the costs. Why am I saying this? (None of this is supposed to be original. Conversely, I am not going to go to the trouble to find the myriad of people who may have said the same thing first. So sue me. I think that's what blogs are for?) Here are some pertinent points: Nobody believes anything if it's not in a GWAS Studies which would previously have been judged to give perfectly respectable evidence to implicate a candidate gene are nowadays completely ignored because the stupid GWAS missed said gene. People don't believe a candidate gene study which yields a corrected p value of 0.001 derived from 20 markers but they do believe a GWAS which produces one p value of 10^-8. There is no logic in this position. But a lot of people take this attitude. At a recent confe
Read more