The Death of Romance

I imagine what follows is a complete violation of all the terms and conditions set by Match.com, violations of copyright law under every state in the land and an abuse of trust and all those things my Mum told me never to do because I am a, ’nice girl.’  But frankly, this one is too good not to share and in some respects a riposte to everything I wrote earlier.  Except it isn’t obviously.  It’s a profile I have stolen from a man who clearly thinks all women are money grabbing men haters.  And I would suggest that the answer to his final question is a large, resounding NO.  Not now.  Not ever. Give it up and buy a dog.

*names and details changed in a pretend attempt to hide identities.

“How am I ever going to spend £5.4 million from my recent Lotto win??”

Oh I don’t know, prostitutes?  Drugs?  Custard creams?

Hello out there!! O.K. Honesty is always a better idea than subterfuge!

Usually yes, yes it is.  Except possibly when you follow it with:

My birth certificate it says ’23rd July,1955′…but I find that so hard to accept.I don’t feel 55,I don’t think I look 55,& I certainly don’t act 55! I can count on the fingers of one finger the number of people who have guessed my age from the way I look & behave!!!

This might be hard for you to understand but take a seat; you do look 55.  You look entirely 55.  Everything about your face screams, ‘I am 55…and may have murdered my wife and stored the remains in a suitcase under the bed.’

I can see how many women out there are ageist,materialistic & incredibly optimistic! So,if you’re looking for expensive nights out in the West End with a toy-boy…..then look elsewhere. I have the financial clout of a wet sponge,the sophistication of bangers-and-mash,& the inability to see in straight lines,or accept that a man has to impress women with anything other than charm,wit,intelligence,sensitivity…& an appreciation of shoes!
An elegant suffiency; ‘effortless superiority’; constant flippancy!!

Agreed about the wet sponge, not entirely sure how to respond to the rest of it.  For once, I am speechless.  Until:

Where did it all go wrong?  When did London become ‘Cougar Town’!!!!????

When did London become ‘Loser Town’!!!!????

Come off it,girls,please….,most younger men I know aren’t that much into older women (not with so many young ones to choose from). It’s a metropolitan,media myth! And those that are…well,…”Mrs Robinson… are you trying to seduce me?!” Benjamin really wanted her daughter!!

Then maybe I too should give it up.  Buy a budgie.  Kill myself.  All viable options before the day that hell freezes over and I start dating in the gene pool responsible for producing words of wisdom like the above.  And while we’re at it, here’s the below:

And some of the photos on these here profiles are a little perplexing too.Are you trying to frighten us men away?! My personal photos are the genuine article;every blemish,every line,every wrinkle! And,yes,I do wear specs,as I am short-sighted. But I can see where I’m going….Honest! And that,apparently,is nowhere fast!

Fair point.  My photos have been air brushed and chosen from a set where I’m wearing my best face.  Not the one I normally wear at weekends.  The one that has been pickled prodigiously in a vat of red wine, bounced a few times off walls that I swear come out of nowhere and then stuffed full of MacDonalds chips at 1am.  But that’s the point yes?  It’s a DATING site.  It’s all about the hard sell.  It’s like Ebay or being a second hand car salesman.  I’ve only been used once and am in pretty good condition with minimal wear and tear but admittedly take about 10 minutes to get going in the morning.  And my gear stick is a bit stiff but the less said about that the better.

Is there anyone out there for me?

Yes.  Because there is definitely someone for everyone.  Probably.  I mean almost everyone.  And if not, like I said get a dog, they are after all, mans best friend.

Img credit: diyana kamaruza

Un-matchable.com

So this was it.  THE year.  Young, free and single and oh the possibilities.  And I’m sure there were many possibilities.  Certainly, if you were gay, had a girlfriend or were just plain not interested – I probably spent the vast majority of 2010 really fancying you.  All of you.  Because not only do I have awful taste in men, I’m also apparently very fickle.

So I decided to wave goodbye to unrequited love and I took my fickle self and threw her into the online dating gene pool.  And I’m sure, in fact I KNOW, that there are lots of normal, lovely people on there.  Some of my best friends met and got into very happy relationships through internet dating.  But let’s just plumb the depths shall we?  Just for a little while and explore the murky waters where hopefully a few of these people might just stay (names changed to protect identities):

First of all we have John, who should know that emails like:

“Morning

you look great

love ya pix

I am John..I work with teenagers in se London xx

Just moved near you!..may need you as my sexy tour guide!”

Do not work and also make him sound like a child molester.

And Bob, I’m sorry Bob if this is a genuine disability but my name is not spelt ‘cliaree’ and the email:

‘whrere did live norh bob.’

seems to be lacking some vital words.

And no Dan I do not:

‘fancy sum fun.’

Maths never really was my strong point.

Then there are the men who send you generic emails that you don’t respond to.  Then forget they’ve already sent you a generic email and send you exactly the same one a few weeks later.  That does get a response, but only to tell the man in question that there was a restraining order in operation and to please never contact me again.

And the ones who should be strongly advised against writing their own profiles:

‘I don’t know why I’m single.’

I would personally suggest that it’s because you write things like this.

‘I am the dogs bollocks.’

Doubtful and I bet the dog probably has a more endearing personality that you do.

‘I do like a bit off sarcasim, but don’t go over the top with it.’

We will NEVER get on then clearly (although he does spell as well as I do).

Not being content with having a face, and now I can roast a duck, time is ripe to find a girly to help lick the platter clean. So my mum deemed instead of my traipsing the watering hovels for a girly, she’d fund me a few more century’s to trickle about this dastardly website.

Well yes, obviously, I’m sure I’d agree if only the hell I knew what you were talking about.  But you DO have a face.  Well done.

And not forgetting the incredibly witty and revealing usernames (names not changed and no identity protected on this one, sorry) step on up (or God PLEASE don’t):

Randyrob_25

Mrluvaluvable_28

Clitlicker__a_839 (who incidentally is looking for a woman of maximum age 74 and I wish him luck with this).

I’m really not going to mention all the men who have ‘winked’ at me that are old enough to be my Dad.  Not that I’m ageist or anything but no, over 60′s don’t really do it for me.

And finally, FINALLY when you pluck up the courage to get to the dating part, there are those men that on a first date try and stick their tongue in your mouth in front of a pub beer garden.  Certainly one you want to take home to meet your Mum.

Life at the moment is far from boring.

Img credit: SeaScapes12

Inside the belly of the beast

If you’re going to watch comedy then there can be few better places to see it than inside a large, plastic, purple, inverted cow on the banks of the Thames.  Udderbelly has arrived on the South Bank.  Replete with a Magners field, giant Connect 4 and deck chairs (knotted hankies not supplied).  From now until 18th July, it will be playing host to the best and not-so-best of the Edinburgh Fringe festival previews.

Danny Bhoy took to the belly of the cow on Friday night.  A man who is, “half Indian and half Scottish, which means that unlike most Scottish people I don’t get sunburnt watching fireworks.” I’ve been a fan of Danny Bhoy for, “one…or even two world cups”.  For a man who rarely uses bad language and does a great line in self-depreciation, he’s still managed to piss off Letterman, swear at the Queen, upset God and, more importantly, Matt Damon.  His observations on life and people are accurate, funny and poignant – recently bemoaning TFL for shutting tube stations because of defective escalators, “surely a defective escalator just turns into a set of stairs?”.  He tells beautifully crafted stories that become well honed tangents with the occasional sideline in the visual subtleties of line dancing, sick cats and blow drying geckos.

However, as the fan with a You Tube addiction who is in full time employment, I could have recited half the gig from memory.  Which meant my very patient companion had to sit through some of the best punchlines that I’d already ruined earlier over copious amounts of lager in the field.

Despite this, if there is one comedian I could recommend this year it would be him.  And as long as you never take me to see gigs with you, I can guarantee that you’ll have a marvelous time.

Homeopathy: Answering the critics

Yes.  I’m one of them.  A closet hippy.  A lentil breathed fox hugger.  One who is conducting an experiment into exactly how many Twitter followers she can lose in a week.  But fuck it (yes, I swear too.  And I eat Neurofen like it’s going out of fashion when I have a hangover).  I’ll enter into the fray.  And I’ll wager that for every story you can tell me about homeopaths doing harm to the public, I’ll counter-attack with a story about someone from traditional medicine (you know, the stuff that actually works) trying to electrically shock a man who had committed suicide (very successfully) by covering himself in petrol.  Still, shocking a stiff back from the dead at the cost of one crispy fried A&E department I’m sure works out economically viable.

The International Journal of Oncology this week published an in vitro (lab based, in test tubes) study stating that homeopathy does have an effect on breast cancer cell lines.

The Finlay Institue, a scientific organisation dedicated to vaccine research and production, recently commisioned a study in Cuba with homeopathy to look at its effects on leptospirosis.  The full paper is still being awaited but it appears that 2.5 million people were given homeopathy in place of the vaccine and mortality from the disease dropped to zero.

A couple of things:

1) I’m not a nutter.  Like it or not, this year I will graduate with a bachelor of sciences in Homeopathy.  Four years of bloody hard graft and extensive anatomy, physiology and pathology training that means you could stick me in the middle of a prostate/uterus and I could find my way out without a map.

2)  It’s not alternative it’s complementary.  I have no intention of taking patients away from doctors.  Ever.  Despite my flippant comment above.  I’ve also not been working into my business plan any kind of acceptable kill quota.  I would very much like to help where there doesn’t currently seem to be a solution.  Like patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.  Of which I used to be one.

3)  If someone comes to see me and they have gangrene and their leg is falling off, the first question I ask will not be: How was your relationship with your mother.  I will send him to A&E.  As long as the doctor with flammable tendencies isn’t on duty that day.

4)  The following essay probably needs more commas.  But frankly, right now I don’t care.  I have four assignments to hand in by April and they take president (which is why I may or may not respond to comments.  Oooh.  The power eh?):

Despite it’s growing popularity and an estimated 14.5% of the population saying that they trust it, thanks to the world of mass media, homeopathy is under attack and closer scrutiny more now than ever before (Samarasekera 2007).  Critics of homeopathy state that it cannot work, that it is irrational and that any positive evidence found in its favour simply reflects a design flaw of its trials.  They conclude that it is the worst kind of medicine (Baum et al 2008).

In the November 2007 edition of the Lancet, Dr Ben Goldacre (2007:1672) wrote the following:

“Five large meta-analyses of homoeopathy trials have been done. All have had the same result: after excluding methodologically inadequate trials and accounting for publication bias, homoeopathy produced no statistically significant benefit over placebo.”

However, Goldacre’s conclusion was not that of the referenced trials.  The conclusion of the Kleijnen et al (1991) meta-analyses was that the clinical evidence was cautiously positive in favour of homeopathy.  They declared that conclusions were difficult to draw due to the low methodology of the included trials.  They stated that homeopathy warranted further investigation.  Cucherat et al (2000) found some evidence to suggest that homeopathy was more effective than placebo but again found the methodology of the reported trials to be lacking and suggested further higher quality trials to be done.  The Boissel et al (1996) analysis stated that the number of significant outcomes cannot be down to chance alone.  The Linde et al (1998) study also found evidence to suggest homeopathy worked but again that the methodology of the trials were weak.  Despite this, it is interesting to note that they recommended serious effort to research homeopathy.  They state that deciding to research homeopathy is recognition that this something that valid both socially and medically despite its implausibility.  Though this would come at a cost they ask whether society can continue to allow it to be approached in an unsystematic way.

It seems that with regards to the meta-analyses, it is Goldacre’s interpretation of what constitutes statistically significant and his opening statement appears to be a direct misquotation of the above trials.  The outcomes of these studies directly contradict his articles main empirical premise and should not be used as evidence against homoeopathy.

As well as the four trials above, the fifth study done by Shang et al (2005) assumed bias in the analysis of trials included in the meta-analysis studied and attributed the weak evidence in favour of homeopathy to be due to this.  They concluded that homeopathy was nothing more than placebo. In fact, the Shang et al (2005) study has been heavily criticised. It claimed to compare 110 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of homoeopathy and 110 RCTs of convention medicine.  Milgrom (2009) claims that the analysis compared only eight homoeopathic and six conventional medicine trials and discarded the remainder.  Thus this trial has been accused of outright bias.  It seems that further investigation needs to be done before definitive conclusions can be drawn either way.

In addition, Goldacre (2007) states that death rates during the cholera epidemic in the 19^th century were lower at the London Homeopathic hospital; 16.4% of cases treated resulted in death compared to conventional treatment resulting in a 53.2% death rate at Middlesex hospital (Hempel 2006).  Goldacre (2007) states that this is due to dangerous medical procedures such as blood letting being standard in conventional medicine at this time and therefore taking an inert pill (i.e. homeopathy) was the most sensible thing to do.  However, Rosenberg (1987) states that cases of untreated cholera have a high death rate.  In epidemics this figure can be up to 90%.  Thus Goldacre’s (2007) explanation is at best anecdotal and fails to address the epidemiological evidence in favour of homeopathy.  Society needs valid and reliable information that is free of opinion in order to make decisions about homeopathy (Linde et al 1998).

In conclusion, further high quality research needs to be done before a definitive verdict can be drawn.  Something that would eventually resolve the issue of the same journals publishing high profile papers concluding homeopathy doesn’t work before publishing further peer reviewed papers stating that it does (Milgrom 2006).

Writing in The Observer (2005) Professor Ernst made the following statement:

“Homeopathic remedies don’t work.  Study after study has shown it is simply the purest form of placebo. You may as well take a glass of water than a homeopathic medicine.”

On the contrary, study after study has in fact shown that homeopathy has a greater effect than placebo.  The Boissel et al (1996) study referred to above reported on 15 high quality trials in order to come to the conclusion that homeopathy is more effective than placebo.  As well as and including those mentioned above, of the 134 RCTs published 59 (44%) were shown to have an effect in favour of homeopathy.  67 (50%) had a neutral to a small effect outcome and 8 (6%) were negative (Tournier 2008).  A further meta-analysis of 93 RCT’s for individual medical conditions reported since 1975 stated that 50 studies showed a definite benefit from homeopathy, 41 had a neutral effect and two were negative (Mathie 2003).  The study concludes that better directed research needs to be carried out before conclusions can be drawn.

In addition, with reference to good quality trials, in 2007 Weber et al conducted a blind RCT study of the effects of homoeopathically prepared thyoxine on highland frogs.  The study categorically showed a difference in the rate of metamorphosis between control and test groups.  The use of frogs in homeopathy is useful as it shows the homeopathic phenomena without using subjective issues such as the reduction of pain in humans.  The conditions of the trial were rigorous, are replicable and were confirmed independently by all three research teams involved.

In 2004, Bell at al conducted a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled trial to assess homeopathy in relation to the treatment of fibromyaligia.  62 people were recruited and 53 people completed the treatment protocol.  The outcome of the trial was that participants on active treatment showed significant improvement in relation to pain, quality of life, overall health and a trend towards less depression compared to those taking placebo.

Ernst’s argument against homeopathy is based on the fact that once the remedies are diluted past a 12c potency they reach Avagadro’s number i.e. they are so highly dilute that they cannot contain a single molecule of the original substance (Baum et al 2008).  Thus are no more effective than drinking a glass of water.  However, Rey (2002) conducted a study that conclusively showed that ultra-high dilutions (past Avagadro’s number) of lithium chloride and sodium chloride emitted the same thermoluminescence of that of the original salts diluted in them.  Indeed an additional study by Roy et al (2004) on the structure of water clearly stated that while it no way looked at clinical efficacy of homeopathy, the study does demolish those arguments based on the fact that the remedy and the water are no different.  They claim that is the structure not the composition that largely controls properties of water.

In addition, the most widely recognised and controversial study relating to water was carried out by Benveniste (1988).  He was studying the human white blood cells involved in allergic reactions and found that even though algE had been diluted past the point of any molecules of the original remaining, basophil granulation (stimulated by algE) continued to take place. His work was discredited by a team from the Nature journal in which it was originally published on the basis that it was statistically ill controlled and biased.  However, Belon et al (2004) have since published results of their study in which high dilutions of histamine was still shown to inhibit basophil activation.  A result which they cannot explain but supports the original findings of Beneveniste.  The consequences for science if these findings are correct would be a complete re-evaluation of physics and chemistry.  Belon et al (2004) conclude that further investigation into this phenomena needs to be carried out.  The implications for homeopathy are obvious and the premise that it is nothing more than pure water is again anecdotal and does not conclusively represent all the available evidence.

In a letter to The Times newspaper and National Health Service (NHS) Primary Care Trusts (PCT’s) Profesor Gustav Born (2007) stated:

“While it may be tempting to dismiss homeopathy expenditure as relatively small across the NHS, we must consider the cultural and social damage of maintaining as a matter of principle expenditure on practices which are unsupported by evidence.”

It is indeed tempting as between 2005 to 2007 there have been almost 50% less homoeopathic prescriptions a cost to the NHS of 0.006% of it’s total budget (Milgrom 2009).  The actions of those who see themselves as defenders of reason and eradicators of all that is pseudo-scientific has lead to significant reductions in doctor referrals to the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital (RLHH) which is now threatened with closure (Milgrom 2009).   It is argued that people should have a right to choose and that in fact homeopathy could in the long term save the NHS money (Dobson 2005) in areas that at the moment conventional medicine fails to treat for example, stress, chronic fatigue etc.  It would also benefit the wider economy as complementary therapies can get people back to work more quickly (Dobson 2005).

With reference to both saving money and the damage involved in maintaining homeopathy, the 2006 House of Commons All Public Party Accounts Committee reported that in conventional medicine in the United Kingdom there were 940,000 recorded accidents by doctors and hospitals, 300,000 hospital acquired infections, 250,000 serious adverse drug reactions (Milgrom 2009).  Further evidence suggests that these figures are under reported (O’Dowd 2006).  This suggests both cultural and social damage on behalf of conventional medicine which goes unmentioned in Born’s letter to the Times.  It is also interesting to note that a recent meta-analyses of antidepressant medications concluded that, when unpublished trials were taken into account, the benefit of antidepressants falls below accepted criteria for significance (Kirsch et al 2008).  In 2006, 31 million prescriptions for antidepressants were written with the use of these drugs rising yearly by 10%.  This came at an estimated cost to the NHS of 291.5 million pounds (Rose 2007).  Yet despite evidence to suggest expenditure on drugs claimed to be ineffective there appear to be no calls for their urgent removal from the NHS.

It would indeed be unethical to expend much need resources on therapies unsupported by evidence but homeopathy, as demonstrated above, is not a practice unsupported by evidence.  But even if it were, Hess (2002) stated that absence of proof is not a proof of absence.  In fact, absence of proof is very hard to prove.  Homeopathy is seen as lacking in evidence as being anti-scientific as it’s current detractors base their views on an extremely narrow interpretation of science and Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) (Milgrom 2009).  Evidence based medicine is supposed to be a process of making a decision based on both clinical experience and sound evidence i.e. information drawn from systematic, reproduce able and unbiased studies (Friedland 1998).  However, what it seems to have become is a hierarchy that places the RCT at the top as the gold standard (Milgrom 2009).  As discussed, RCTs of homeopathy have been done with variable results.  But does this mean that the large body of observational and clinical evidence should just be dismissed?  And that because homeopathy doesn’t have an agreed mode of action that it should too?  Smith et al (2003) carried out a systematic review of parachute intervention and were unable to find any RCTs thus it has never been rigorously tested.  Advocates of EBM criticise the use of interventions that have been tested and evaluated using only observational data.  The authors conclude that perhaps the main protagonists of EBM would benefit from taking part in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled crossover trial of the parachute.  This study demonstrates that the RCT is not always the most appropriate method for evaluating data.  Yet this is the method that Professor Ernst uses to evaluate and dismiss homeopathy.

In conclusion, though homeopathy is seen as being implausible there is a growing body of evidence both clinical and observational to suggest that it has an effect above and beyond that of placebo.  Further high quality trials need to be done to address the issue of methodological weaknesses.  This would provide society, as suggested by Linde et al (1998), with the valid and reliable information that it needs in order to make a decision about homeopathy.

References

Arnara, J., Beauvais, F., Belon, P., Benveniste, J., Davenas, E., Fortner, P,. Miadonna, A., Oberbaum, M.,   Poitevin, B., Pomeranz, B., Robinzon, B., Tedeschi, A.,  Sainte-Laudy, J., 1998.  Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE.  Nature. 333: 816-818.  Available from: http://www.digibio.com/cgi-bin/node.pl?lg=us&nd=n4_1 [Accessed 12^th April 2009].

Baum, M., Ernst, E., 2008.  The Homeopathy Hoax. Great Britain: Spiked.  Available from: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/wellcome/article/5104/ [Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Bell, I., Lewis, D., Brooks, A., Schwartz, G,. Lewis, A., Walsh, B., Baldwin, C., 2004.  Improved clinical status in fibromyalgia patients treated with individualized homeopathic remedies versus placebo.  Rheumatology. 43: 577 – 582.

Belon, P., Cumps, J., Ennis, M., Mannaioni, PF., Roberfroid, M., Sainte-Laudy, J., Wiegant, FA., 2004.  Histamine dilutions modulate basophil activation.  Inflammation research. 53:181-8.  Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15105967?dopt=Abstract [Accessed: 12^th April 2009]

Born, G., 2007. Letter calling for homeopathy boycott. Great Britian: Times online.  Available from:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article1827553.ece [Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Cucherat, C., Haugh, MC., Gooch, M., Boissel, JP., 2000.  Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy: a meta-analysis of clinical trials. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.  56: 27-33.  Available from:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=Search&term=Eur%20J%20Clin%20Pharmacol[Jour]+AND+56[Volume]+AND+27[page]  [Accessed: 4^th April 2009].

Dobson, R., 2005.  Alternative therapies could save the NHS money, says report commissioned by Prince Charles.  British Medical Journal. 331: 795.  Available from:  http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/331/7520/795-a/DC1 [Accessed: 5^th April 2009].

Friedland, D J,. 1998.  Evidence Based Medicine A Framework for Clinical Practice. United States of America: McGraw-Hill Medical.

Goldacre, B., 2007.  Benefits and risks of homeopathy.  The Lancet. 370: 1672 – 1673.  Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61706-1/fulltext [Accessed: 4^th April 2008].

Hempel, S., 2006. The medical detective. London: Granta Books.

Hess, DR., 2002.  Secretion Clearance Techniques: Absence of Proof or Proof of Absence?  The Science Journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care.  47: 757.

Kirsch, I., Deacon, BJ., Huedo-Medina, TB., Scoboria, A., Moore, TJ., Johnson, BT., 2008. Initial Severity and Antidepressant Benefits: A Meta-Analysis of Data Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. Public Library of Science Medicine. Available from:  http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050045 [Accessed: 9^th April 2009].

Kleijnen, J., Knipschild, P., ter Riet, G., 1991.  Clinical Trials of Homeopathy.  British Medical Journal. 302:316-23.  Available from:  http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/302/6772/316?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=trials+of+homeopathy&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT [Accessed 4^th April 2008].

Linde, K., Melchart, D., 1998. Randomized controlled trials of individualized homeopathy: a state-of-the-art review. Journal Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 4: 371-388.  Available from:

http://www.chemie.uni-hamburg.de/igtw/Gesundheit/studium/material/wisslit_04/8LindeLancet1997.pdf Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Mathie, RT., 2003.  The research evidence base for homeopathy: a fresh assessment of the literature.  Journal Homeopathy. 92 84-91.

Milgrom, L., 2008.  Homeopathy and the new fundamentalism.  Presented at the Research in Homeopathy conference convened by the Complementary Medical Association, at the University of Westminster, London, 18th June 2008. Available from: http://www.anhcampaign.org/documents/dr-lionel-milgroms-presentation-research-homeopathy-conference-london-18th-june-2008 [Accessed 4th April 2009].

O’Dowd, A., 2006.  Adverse incidents in NHS are still under-reported.  British Medical Journal. 333: 59.  Available from: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/333/7558/59 [Accessed 5^th April 2009].

Rey, L., 2002.  Thermoluminescence of ultra-high dilutions of lithium chloride and sodium chloride.  Switzerland: Elsevier Science.  Available from:  http://www.vhan.nl/documents/Rey.thermoluminescence.pdf [Accessed: 5^th April 2009].

Rose, D., 2007.  Britain becomes a Prozac nation. Great Britain: Times online.  Available from: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article1784993.ece [Accessed 9th April 2009].

Rosenberg, C., 1987.  The cholera years: the United States in 1832, 1849, and 1866.  USA: University of Chicago Press.

Roy, R., Tiller, WA., Bell, I., Hoover, MR., 2004.  The structure of liquid water; novel insights from materials research;  potential relevance to homeopathy. Available from: http://www.rustumroy.com/Roy_Structure of Water.pdf [Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Samarasekera, U., 2007.  Pressure grows against homoeopathy in the UK. The Lancet. 370: 1677 – 1678. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61708-5/fulltext?_eventId=login [Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Shang, A., Huwiler-Müntener, K., Nartey, L., Dorig, S., Sterne, J., Pewsner, MD., Egger, M., 2005.   Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. The Lancet. 366: 726-732.  Available from:  http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(05)67177-2/fulltext [Accessed 4^th April 2009].

Smith, G., Pell, J., 2003.  Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.  British Medical Journal. 327: 1459 – 1461.  Available from: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/327/7429/1459 [Accessed 5th April 2009].

Tournier, A., 2008.  PDF 2008.  Overview of the current state of the research in Homeopathy. Available from: http://homeoinst.org/material/HomeoEvidenceOverviewJune2008.pdf.  [Accessed: 6^th April 2009]

Img credit: Gaetan Lee

Tea and Adventures

If there’s one thing I learnt yesterday, it’s not to confuse the international sign language for coconuts with that for breasts.  It’s an important distinction.  I’d attempt to show you but fear the meaning would get lost somewhere in the text.

Yesterday myself and Holly had afternoon tea with the Adventurists.  At the Royal Geographic Society.  Which I understand doesn’t normally let people of the Northern persuasion (or least people from Accrington) through its doors.  We were most privileged.  It’s an extremely impressive building.  Started in 1830 as an institution to further the advancement of geographical science, it boasts famous names such as Livingstone, Scott and Hillary.  An awe-inspiring place to spend a chilly Saturday afternoon in February.  Not only was the talk by Lois Pryce incredibly inspirational, sparking off dreams of international travel in a floating rickshaw*, but the cake was bloody lovely.

It got me to thinking about risks.  And adventure.  I’ve always tried to live by the adage that it’s better to regret the things you do than the things you don’t do.  But sometimes the fear kicks in.  And it shouldn’t, because as the very beautiful Helena asked today, ‘What’s your biggest fear?  Fancy facing it? Go on – it’s only fear.”  She has a point.  And as Lois pointed out, if we did risk assessments for everything, we’d never leave the house.  Last year saw me taking the biggest risk and jump into the unexpected that I’d made for a very long time.  Yet it paid off for all concerned.  And taught me many a lesson in what it truly means to be happy.  And it was an adventure.  It didn’t involve new countries or impenetrable languages where signing is your only option (see above).  But it was certainly life altering.  My plans for the future are ever-changing.  Perhaps I spent too much of my childhood reading The Famous Five, dreaming of having adventures and ginger beer, but whatever happens in twenty ten facing fears and having adventures is certainly top of my list of priorities.

*Note for my Mum: At no point would I consider this.  Ever.  I mean, absolutely, definitely, probably not.

Image credit: @_linco

The Fine Art of Procrastination

I probably forgot to mention that the only blogging I’ll be doing is when I have many other extremely important things to do.  Procrastination being as it is, the top skill on my CV.  And now seems like as good a time as any seeing as I have a 4,000 word case study to write, a 4,000 word research proposition to hash together, some supervision sessions to falsify, a business plan to prepare and an appointment with the bank manager to make.  And I should probably wash some socks at some point too.  Life is just one endless stream of difficult tasks.

Except January so far, has been quite tame.  If not a little bit nippy.  I mean yes, it’s involved polar bears and lime eating and half a tiger and being chased round Sainsbury’s by security men and plans for future adventure and new jobs and exciting news (that I can’t tell you) and scandalous gossip (that I definitely can’t tell you).  So it looks like I’ll have to spend the day being productive.  And there’s nothing I hate more than productivity.  Damn.

Image credit: tomswift46

Twenty Ten

2009 was all different kinds of unexpected.  So it’s fitting really that 2010 was seen in mostly with conversations in and around (thank God not literally) Jeremy Clarkson’s testicles.  And was eased in (yes, this is Carry On Blogging) by Myleen Klass.  After a Christmas spent largely not drinking (please ignore all earlier blogs about alcohol)  I apparently managed to drink a whole bottle of wine.  And I know this because I can barely hear the screaming of police sirens outside (I live far too near Lewisham) over the sounds of my grumbling tummy.

Last night was, minus the testicles, all about the describing of words for nothing more than the pride and glory of the win.  It went something like this (please note these are serious answers):

Chris: Right, there are lots of them in Amsterdam and boats go down them.

Andrew: Prostitutes?

Claire and Holly: It’s an object, it’s green, like an onion but longer and the Welsh eat lots of them.

Nat: Garlic bread?

So anyway, what I’m trying to say, in a roundabout/mentally disturbing images kind of way is: Happy New Year.  And just so you know, it’s going to be fabulous.

Image credit: meivocis

The Six Days of Christmas – Day Six

Was woken by a combination of brain shattering sunshine penetrating through the curtains and my caffeine angel Jen far too early.  It was 11am and we had an appointment with Father Christmas.  At Harrods.  But not before I experienced how showers feel when there is absolutely no hot water left.  The perfect thing for a hangover.

Myself and Jen (still, by all accounts leaking alcohol out of our eyeballs, skin and breath) skated to the train station with her brother Chris and his girlfriend Mayyah.  Chris is a Christmas elf at Harrods.  He was carrying a bag containing nothing but wigs.

On route I ate a mint Aero in an attempt to firstly soak up some alcohol and second disguise my Vodka breath.   I didn’t want Father Christmas thinking I was a bad girl.  My Dad always told me I’d get a stocking full of ashes if I was naughty (and I remember one year considering being naughty just to find out what that was).

We arrive at Harrods and they let me in despite carrying last nights clothes in a Primark bag.  Being VIP’s we went straight in to see Father Christmas who showed us his invisible robin. We requested variously a My Little Pony Castle, some Sylvanian Families and seven puppies. He asked us if we’d like a photo.  The result is the above.  Not pictured are the brilliant badges and chocolate coins we also received.

Continued to wander round Harrods complaining about sore feet, dehydrated heads, people who can afford to pay £4,000 for a puppy and trying hard not to kill tourists.  Before wandering in a dazed stupor around Victoria bus station trying to remember where the hell the bus went from.  The drying out process begins here.  Merry Christmas.

The Six Days of Christmas – Day Five

Saturday is something of a blur being that what happened was half a litre of Vodka and the latest night out since I was 19 (not including the two nights earlier this year when I just didn’t come home).

It was the night of the Choi Kwang Do Christmas party set in the dizzying heights of Morden (dizzying thanks to the strong smell of urine that hits you in the face as soon as you step off the tube).

Things that I am certain happened: I ate most of the buffet, I found out unrepeatable gossip, I danced to Kung Fu fighting rather hard, Jen played Little Boots far too much, Jen attempted to drag a black belt onto the dance floor and was tipped unceremoniously onto her bottom, amorous advances were laughed at and declined (and his girlfriend will be happy to hear that), people danced in a circle like they were st a school disco, people were dragged onto the dance floor by me and made to dance to Queen (I really am the coolest person you’ll ever meet), I fell asleep under a pile of coats waiting for Jen to stop chatting and dancing, I was hugged many times by my instructors, told I was thought a lot of and eventually fell into bed at 4am with a rather large headache.

Image credit: Mercedes Dayanara

The Six Days of Christmas – Day Four

Friday, dear God Friday.  The alarm went off and I peeled myself unhappily from the mattress, stuffed myself onto public transport next to a man who was clearly still drunk and headed to my university clinic.  To provide cheap and affordable healthcare to the masses.  With a hangover.  And five hours sleep.  And only six colleagues.  For eight patients.  All of which needed two students in consultation.  And the clinic supervisors were snowed in.  The lunatics were well and truly running the asylum.

But as one colleague was far more hungover than me (who was floating lack of sleep on an experimental sea of caffeine) I felt much better about the whole situation.  And only fell asleep on the floor once (and not during a consultation).

All patients were eventually sent off happy and medicated (as the supervisors finally skied in to join us).  Starbucks turnover was doubled and all tourists escaped a scalping during my journey home just for getting in my way.  Or breathing too loudly.  Mark that one up for a success I think.