Alternative science

Some Christian groups argue that creation, described in the Bible, should be regarded as a scientific hypothesis. The concept appears to emanate from the opinion that hypotheses may be scientific, based on their content.

The discussion is called Creationism.

A summary of the area can be found at The TalkOrigins Archive.

Supporters of Creationism have, in my opinion, great problems. It is not the content of the hypothesis, but reproducible verifications of the hypothesis, that determine the scientific level of the concept that the hypothesis deals with.

Groups claiming an alternative life style, often alternative medicine, criticise the scientific community for being confined.

I agree: Science is confined, science is restricted. It should be. My opinion is that this is the best protection we have against intentional and unintentional errors in questions that are vital for our health.

There are certainly many verifiable observations that are not yet carried out. New ideas and ways of thinking will probably rise.

But these new views must be verified by reproducible observations before they can be held as scientific.

Samuel Hahnemann, originator of homeopathy
(image: Wikipedia)

Verification by observations is the only method we have that, at least partially, may sieve away the flood of erroneous statements that constantly are poured over us by various interest constellations.

Magnets are often claimed to increase human health and decrease pain. A Google search on "magnets" and "health" gave 6 million hits, most of them selling magnets for increased health.

Does is exist verified observations that support use of magnets as health enhancers?

The year 2004 a well written article about magnet therapy was published in the serious journal British Medical Journal, BMJ. A conclusion in the article was:

Our study has not entirely resolved the extent to which the effect of magnetic bracelets is specific or due to placebo

Harlow et al. (2004) - BMJ 329, s.1450-1454

In spite of this conclusion, the article is cited as support for effect of magnet therapy among sellers of magnet products.

The year 2006 an Editorial about magnet therapy in BMJ was published. The citation "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence" summarizes why the scientific society often seems to be prejudiced against to new revolutionizing methods in medicine.

During 2006, the Swedish "Läkartidningen" published a discussion between Sven Nilsson and David Bergquist/Erik Wahlberg concerning scientific arguments behind marketing of products for magnet therapy.

The same Sven Nilsson as above in 2008 published a report in Swedish about how restless legs was influenced by pulsating electro-magnetic fields. The article represents a clear demonstration of the function of science.

The completed study showed that treatment using placebo and treatment using pulsating electromagnetic fields gave identical results against restless legs, tingling and nightly calf muscle cramp.

Nilsson (2008) - Pulserande elektromagnetiska fält och placebo gav samma effekt, Läkartidningen 32-33, s.2167-2170.
(transl.: vetenskapsteori.se