Naked Science Forum

General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: jfoldbar on 10/07/2021 23:57:11

Title: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 10/07/2021 23:57:11
i wasnt sure what to name this thread.
i was reading on another science forum about people who claim to be able to feel xrays (leg, hip dentist etc). and their possible explanations.
this got me thinking about all the things that some humans experience, that doesnt fit into the scientific norm, or is just on the edge.
things like,,,,
#we can sense when someone is looking at us
# some identical twins that are separated can sense what is happening to the other twin
#we know what song will come on the radio next
# gut feeling. (i think called hunch in some countries)
# whitetail spider
#some people affect electronic things.

you get the idea. ( i know some of my examples here are already fully explainable by science, i was simply trying to portray my though as to what im looking for)

my question is, i like reading and watching various studies on this type of thing. and while i have read and watched many, i would like to find more.
is there any specific place that lists them? so i can just go through them systematically.

Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Eternal Student on 11/07/2021 01:00:36
Hi.

Sorry, I don't know where you can find a list of these things.
I think half the problem is that no one would like to call their studies "pseudo-science" since this has a negative connotation.  Equally, no one usually wants to add their special interest area to any list of things that are already considered to be pseudo-science.

There used to be TV shows about weird things and the para-normal,  maybe you should just look through some of those to find some topics.

If you're asking about this forum - well there isn't a  "weird and wonderful" section that I know of  but some unorthodox pseudo-science does turn up in every section.   There's a "new theories" section and also a "that can't be true" section, which might be worth a look through.

In general, the guidelines for using this site do ask people to keep pseudo-science off the main sections of this forum.  So I can't encourage you to start a new thread that promotes Pseudo-Science.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bogie_smiles on 11/07/2021 02:26:35
Try searching under the heading of "unusual science". There are many ways to branch off from there ...
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Kryptid on 11/07/2021 02:39:58
Whitetail spider?
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: evan_au on 11/07/2021 05:31:26
Quote from: jfoldbar, Kryptid
Whitetail spider ... Whitetail spider?
There is a kind of spider in Australia, with the common name of Whitetail spider. It has also started to appear in New Zealand...

It got a reputation that it's bite caused a horrible flesh-eating disease. We occasionally saw people on TV where the skin on their arm was eaten away, after a bite from a whitetail spider.

I understand that a more careful study showed that there was no link to white-tail spiders - people just saw the disease, and blamed the spider for it. I guess that qualifies as "pseudo-science"! I am not sure if this is the specific piece of pseudoscience that was intended...

Scientific version: https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2003/179/4/white-tail-spider-bite-prospective-study-130-definite-bites-lampona-species
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 11/07/2021 07:53:10
yep, thats basically it about the spider. i personally know 2 people who were bit.
1 guy was bit on the hand, even 5 years later his arm looked as though it had just had boiling oil thrown on it., yet there is no scientific reason (that has been found) that explains this.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/07/2021 10:42:29
yep, thats basically it about the spider. i personally know 2 people who were bit.
1 guy was bit on the hand, even 5 years later his arm looked as though it had just had boiling oil thrown on it., yet there is no scientific reason (that has been found) that explains this.
You didn't read the  web page, did you?
 https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2003/179/4/white-tail-spider-bite-prospective-study-130-definite-bites-lampona-species


Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 11/07/2021 11:40:17

[/quote]
You didn't read the  web page, did you?
 https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2003/179/4/white-tail-spider-bite-prospective-study-130-definite-bites-lampona-species
[/quote]


yep, and thats exactly my point.


"Considerable work has been done on the venom of white-tail spiders over the past 10 years because of the reports of necrotic ulcers.21,22,23 Study of the cytotoxic effects of the venom showed it has little potential to cause necrosis.21,22 In one study, the venom had little effect on human cell cultures"

in the case of white tail, what studies show differs from what people experience.
there are a few medical anomalies that at the moment science has little or no explanation for.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/07/2021 11:46:39
One explanation is simple.
The necrosis is not caused by the bite of that spider.
Here are some bits you didn't read.
" There were 79 bites"
"There were no cases of necrotic ulcers "
"other diagnoses must be sought."


If you assume that the damage is caused by a spider bite then you look for treatments involving antivenoms and such.
If you realise that the spider is irrelevant then you look for what might actually cause the ulceration.
One possibility is something like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necrotizing_fasciitis

There will be others.
But, if you are misled into thinking it's a spider bite, then you may not find the right treatment.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 11/07/2021 12:00:34
sure, as a general rule of thumb i agree with you. many times its an incorrect spider etc. but there are times where this does indeed happen.
the guy i worked with, was bit on the hand. he caught the spider and had it identified as a whitetail. he saw a skin specialist for 10 years after that to clear up the "whatever you call it".
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Halc on 11/07/2021 12:03:50
#we know what song will come on the radio next
I did this one while driving. I suddenly was totally sure that the next song would be "Come Together" by the Beatles.
Alas, I was wrong. It was the "Come Together" cover by Aerosmith.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: alancalverd on 11/07/2021 12:34:43
was reading on another science forum about people who claim to be able to feel xrays (leg, hip dentist etc). and their possible explanations.
Nothing unusual about "feeling x-rays."

If the floor of an x-ray room is an insulator, you can acquire a significant static charge when moving across it. X-rays ionise the air around your body and the charge redistributes. Because the charge is acquired fairly slowly, you don't notice the hair on your body gradually standing up, but the rapid discharge is noticeable as it all collapses at once. Ionisation of the fluids in your mouth and even inside your tongue can produce a sensation often described as a "metallic" taste.

It's not easy to demonstrate the phenomenon unequivocally because medical x-ray machines make a clunk or buzz when emitting radiation, but the physical measurement of body charge or ionisation is quite simple.   
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/07/2021 12:44:41
sure, as a general rule of thumb i agree with you. many times its an incorrect spider etc. but there are times where this does indeed happen.
the guy i worked with, was bit on the hand. he caught the spider and had it identified as a whitetail. he saw a skin specialist for 10 years after that to clear up the "whatever you call it".
There is a name for this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 11/07/2021 20:07:47
are you saying that if something is rare, it is therefore impossible?
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 11/07/2021 20:54:39
are you saying that if something is rare, it is therefore impossible?
No.
I am saying there is no reason to believe that the spider had anything to do with the skin condition.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 12/07/2021 08:07:33
even though the spider was correctly identified , and both the guys gp, and skin specialist both said the spider seems to be the only explanation for the guys bad arm?
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/07/2021 08:32:14
You would need to know if those two had seen that web page.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: jfoldbar on 12/07/2021 08:47:49
of course, no way to know that. but curious what difference it would make? is that webpage pure gospel?  what it says it 100% accurate and there is zero possibility that there could ever be anything doesnt  fit the parameters of that webpage?
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/07/2021 13:45:16
what difference it would make?
They might have recognised they were making this mistake.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Petrochemicals on 12/07/2021 20:40:26
Quote from: jfoldbar, Kryptid
Whitetail spider ... Whitetail spider?
There is a kind of spider in Australia, with the common name of Whitetail spider. It has also started to appear in New Zealand...

It got a reputation that it's bite caused a horrible flesh-eating disease. We occasionally saw people on TV where the skin on their arm was eaten away, after a bite from a whitetail spider.

I understand that a more careful study showed that there was no link to white-tail spiders - people just saw the disease, and blamed the spider for it. I guess that qualifies as "pseudo-science"! I am not sure if this is the specific piece of pseudoscience that was intended...

Scientific version: https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2003/179/4/white-tail-spider-bite-prospective-study-130-definite-bites-lampona-species

That sounds like a bacteria or a parasite. I once had an infected pore or hair follicle on my face. It swole and was painful and visible. It finally eased and vented its liquid. Then the pore next to it became swollen in a similar manner and like wise eased finally. Then another neighbouring pore and this continued for some time, about 10 pores in total, each consecutive neighbouring poreswole after the previous pore eased. I finally deduced it must be a parasite moving from one pore to the other  and put a large amount of iodine on the current pore. After that it never came back. There is actually a great deal in biology that is not studied. They have only recently decided the appendix is a store for the microbiome rather than a vestige of of our ancient ancestor's digestive system.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: Bored chemist on 12/07/2021 20:55:01
They have only recently decided the appendix is
It's not our decision.
Title: Re: where are the pseudoscience studies?
Post by: casualty on 12/07/2021 22:29:12
Results must be reproducible in order to qualify as science instead of pseudoscience. The head of research for the DSM-IV indicates that psychiatric diagnoses are not reproducible: "There are lots of studies which show that clinicians diagnose most of their patients with one particular disorder and really don’t systematically assess for other disorders. They have a bias in reference to the disorder that they are especially interested in treating..." New Yorker Magazine, 2005-01-03, "The Dictionary of Disorder".