Abortion in Queensland – is it what you think?

If you criminalise abortion, what do you expect will happen?

(The Australian) TEGAN Simone Leach was 19, pregnant and “scared” when her boyfriend’s sister arrived in Cairns last Christmas Day with a consignment of contraband tablets and doctor’s instructions written in Ukrainian.

What transpired after Ms Leach allegedly terminated her pregnancy with the abortion pill RU486 and the Queensland police got involved, has unleashed a legal and political storm of the like not seen before in this country.

Ms Leach will face court next month charged with the crime of procuring her own miscarriage, in what is believed to be the first case of its kind to be brought under Queensland’s century-old abortion laws.

If convicted, she faces up to seven years’ jail.

The young man in her life, Sergie Brennan, 21, faces up to 14 years’ imprisonment for attempting to procure an abortion and three years’ jail on a further charge of supplying the means to procure an abortion. [more]

As expected there is quite a lot of anger coming from liberal left sector – with the launch of the Pro-choice Action Collective in Queensland. They have a facebook group and a website. But is this the right case to be defending?

Love, share, learn

As seems to always be the case, as soon as I decide to take a short blog break, people link to me.

Greg did it twice. Hat-tipping me for that cool UK Swine Flu video I spotted – and also featuring some of my flu posts on this month’s Scientia Pro Publica – a collection of awesome science blogging written for the people – this month’s theme: OMG … Science is Everywhere! You can read more about SciProPub at Grrl Scientist.

I have also been quoted (and named, with my real name!) at BNET Pharma industry blog. I do have to agree with the sentiment. It would be a lot easier to sound sane if when I try to defend Pharma against claims of unethical practices if the industry I am trying to defend would just kindly stop engaging in them…

Child Labour: Cheaper by the dozen

This is a very interesting development in the ethical debate of using children in reality family TV – does it constitute a violation of child labour laws?

Jon & Kate Plus 8 has garnered the biggest ratings in it’s four-year history due to the tabloid brouhaha over the couple’s marriage. It has also attracted the notice of the Pennsylvania labor department, who are investigating whether the show complies with the state’s child labor laws.

If no violation is found, could this be a gateway to a number of child sweatshops installing extra security cameras and then claiming it’s really a groundbreaking new reality show, Kids, Inc.

Rx-ky business

Well, AFM called me up on the Insight post for painting my town¹ a little too apologetic for our phriends in Pharma (possibly due to some comments I made on this post of his, and these over at The Scientist, and also just today on Flickr…) .

So I guess I should make some self-apologetics, that my point has *not* been that Pharma is cute and cuddly and can always be trusted – c’mon they are industry – the wonderful Merck saga unfolds beyond just deceptive journals – this sort of awful ‘hit list’ language to “neutralise” and worse, “discredit”, critical doctors makes me cringe (and if you’re sick of hearing about Vioxx, you can get upset at Lilly’s innapropriate off-label Zyprexa marketing instead). There is nothing I can concoct to attempt to downplay the totally unethical nature of that sort of behaviour, to me it is indefensible. There are bad elements out there. Even if we rule the Vioxx shenanigans as an exceptional exception (which is the closest I can get to a defence) just take a look at the US statistics on Pharma fines and settlements made by over the last 9 years (and that just to the government, does not include private parties, class actions etc.)

Pharmaceutical companies are corporations. And yes, they are motivated by making money. And AFM is right, some guy in marketing will try to put that goal ahead of making quality medicines. But let’s remember that’s also what these companies are about making medicines. Medicines that help people. People do not get into this industry because they want to hurt people.

And that is where I start to get annoyed by anti-Pharma movements.

Who is testing cancer vaccines?

As I wrap up my “Pharma is your Phriend” series, lets take a look at some more research.

This is a very interesting analysis of cancer vaccine trials using data mining from Open Access journal, Immunome Research.

The authors have taken advantage of there being quite a lot of publicly available information on clinical trials these days (yes, it is there, if you know where to look¹) to amass a whole host of information on cancer vaccine clinical trials for a type of analysis known as data mining.

There own summary of the results reads:

This application enables rapid extraction of information about institutions, diseases, clinical approaches, clinical trials dates, predominant cancer types in the trials, clinical opportunities and pharmaceutical market coverage. Presentation of results is facilitated by visualization tools that summarize the landscape of ongoing and completed cancer vaccine trials. Our summaries show the number of clinical vaccine trials per cancer type, over time, by phase, by lead sponsors, as well as trial activity relative to cancer type and survival data. We also have identified cancers that are neglected in the cancer vaccine field: bladder, liver, pancreatic, stomach, esophageal, and all of the low-incidence cancers.

Two cool things I learned from the paper were: Vaccines for cancers have been in development since the 1970s, and melanoma has been the cancer studied most for a vaccine, even though the first ones out to market have been for cervical cancer (expect melanoma vaccines in the next 1-5 years?).

But as we are looking to shift this discussion towards the pharmaceutical industry, let’s look at who runs clinical trials (Pop up: Figure 2a).

The death of TV news

Politics and twitter are killing intelligent news on your TV. Perhaps I should add “comedy satire news programs” to that list as well.

more about "The death of TV news", posted with vodpod

And that’s how you were born

Late last month, Western Australia granted a woman the right to extract her dead husband’s sperm for storage. The courts will later decide in a separate if she is allowed to use it to get herself up the duff through the wonders of modern science.

Hmmm… dead guys can’t say no?

To be fair, the couple were allegedly already undergoing IVF, so perhaps it is a strong argument that the deceased would have been consenting to the procedure if he wasn’t … well … deceased.

Just before I left Brisbane, JJJ’s Hack ran a story on IVF and social normalcy. It’s weird knowing your parents had sex to have you. It’s possibly more wierd knowing they didn’t. Would it be even more weirder knowing that your parents didn’t have sex after your dad was dead in order to have you?

Should any of the back story really matter?

For those of you who don’t mind a little NSFW – take a look Hard’s only “happy” sex losers webcomic.

Ethics in media: Diabulimia

The news is pumping out stories in response to a report “Insulin Misuse for Weight Loss” that claims diabetics have started skipping insulin shots in order to get thin.

I found the story through a google feed at 6minutes.com.

I tried to find the report itself, but Google is swamped by diabetes news stories at the moment. I was initially perplexed, diabetes is linked to obesity, how can avoiding treatment cause weight-loss? Of course, obesity is only linked to type II (or late-onset) diabetes – which is not treated with injections – type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes is not linked to obesity.

But explanations like this were not very prevalent in the media. When reporting on dangerous self harm behaviour, the media needs to maintain its head and consider the ethical implications of what they write. There is a need to balance their responsibility to inform the public with another social responsibility not to cause further harm. By reporting on such behaviour, and giving in notoriety, can they actually give it some sort of credibility and encourage people to try it out? Ensuring that concepts are explained fully, and are provided in context goes a long way to help this.

Some articles did not even explain the consequences of avoiding injections – which include systemic damage, blindness, coma and death. I found the term “Diabulimia” at this slightly hysteric article. But past the hype, the article actually attempted to explain the rational behind this behaviour. In order to work your body already has to be in a pretty bad state, as it involves dehydration (the weight lost is from water) and muscle catabolism (the wieght lost is from muscle). You are in serious trouble if your body is breaking down muscle for your energy needs.

But I want to highlight this paragraph in the article:

Many people believe word is spreading via internet message boards and chat rooms, where existing diabulimics are encouraging more and more women to lose weight by not taking their required insulin doses. Although the practise of losing weight by skipping insulin injections in not a new one, it seems to have grown out of control with the advent of the internet.

Isn’t the writer herself spreading the story on the internet herself? Are ‘news’ articles and opinion pieces (or even shoddy blog entries) on dangerous emerging social disorders part of the problem? How do you make the difference between raising awareness and excacerbating the issue?

Diabetes Australia is the national peak body for information and support services about diabetes mellitus.

Ethics of pet trade

Story on audio at HACK.

Animal activists are concerned that too many pets are bought from pet shops on impulse. They’re also allege many of the pets are supplied to the stores from illegal puppy breeding farms.

Hence the bill in New South Wales parliament which if passed will ban the sale of cats and dogs in pet stores. Pet store owners are up in arms saying they have animal welfare as a primary concern. They believe they are the victims of cheap political point scoring.

The original bill was to apply to all pet sales from pet stores. That bill was scrapped, and at the time of this radio story it was being redrafted just to apply to cats and dogs. Abandoned hamsters and other furries (and non-furries, like fish) are obviously not an issue…

The argument for this law does make some sense. Puppy mills are an issue, and so are abandoned animals. It’s easy to see how making everyone get new pets from a shelter could make the world a better place.

However, in reply the pet industry also makes a good point – many sales are not made through pet stores, and that is the source of puppy mill trading. Banning sales through regulated pet stores might exacerbate the problem by creating further demand for privately (and unregulatedly) bred puppies and kittens.

More sensible approaches might be further regulation of private sales, and subsidies for pet desexing and registration.

Study: Stabbing ≈ relief?

I really want more information before I make judgement on this news release:

“Acupuncture beats drug to hot flashes: study“

But I already have a few flags.

The best outline of the study was at the hospital’s own press release (I could find no peer reviewed published data*, anyone care to point to it).

“Seventy of the 140 patients enrolled in the two-year study will be randomly assigned to receive acupuncture for 12 weeks. The other half will receive Effexor over the same time period. Data will be collected at quarterly intervals in the first year. Researchers will test the effectiveness of acupuncture for reducing hot flashes and if it has fewer side effects than Effexor.” – Henry Ford Health n.d

ZZ: Please note Reuters places the final included patients figure at 47 patients, but still has them split 50:50. Lots of drop outs and exclusions*, or did they just shortfall their expected enrolment.

Now the design almost seems well and good. Patients were selected for meeting criteria, such as having 14 or more flashes per day etc. But while patients are being randomly assigned, it’s not exactly blind* is it? You can’t really hide who your giving medicine too and who you are jabbing acupuncture needles into.

Additionally, where are the controls? There is no placebo* on either treatment. A good study would at least have a third group receiving a placebo version of Effexor. An excellent study would also use placebo acupuncture or at least a placebo CAM (complimentary or alternitive medicine – or “woo”). A mindblowingly overfunded mega-study would have groups receiving both treatments, and combinations of conventional and CAM treatments and conventional and CAM placebos.

Were the patients denied any other treatments while on this study? or after the treatment period, (acupuncture was given 12 weeks out of the 104)? Sometimes clinical studies comparing a new drug’s efficacy allow standard drugs to be used as well. Otherwise you are denying a patient ethical treatment. Sometimes that “standard drugs” used in addition to the treatments on trial may even be the drugs you drawing comparisons with. Perhaps the acupuncture group was taking Effexor or other drugs*. And perhaps in lower doses, explaining their lower levels of side-effects.

So, what exactly is Effexor?  Well it’s the proprietery name for venlafaxine (Wyeth must be so happy about this free press). It’s an antidepressant, not an anti-hot flash medication. Now, while not its intended use, there is evidence that low doses of venlafaxine and other antidepressentscan effect relief during hot flashes , but it is not the standard treatment as the news reports are suggesting*. Mayoclinic’s page on hot flashes explains that hormones (oestrogen, progesterone) are what is recommended.

Don’t miss the flip-flop after the break.

Ni-Chan founder discusses responsibility irresponsibly

Japanese forum/message board service 2 channel (ni-chan), in the words of founder Hiroyuki Nishimura holds THE monopoly on the online forum market in Japan. This is backed up by stats – around 200 million hits a day.

The website allows any internet user to read and post any material in an anonymous practically uncensored manner. It’s not surprising then that other stats include over 100 lawsuits on matters such as defamation and supporting criminal activities. the most recent controversy was stirred when it was revealed Kato Tomohiro, the perpetrator Akihabara massacre, posted intent to commit his acts on 2ch.

If you like you can take a look at a translated interview with Nishimura here, where he discusses some of the matters regarding his responsibility for material posted by users on his website.

Nishimura starts of well. He defends freedom of media, and tries to explain that he really can’t be held accountable for material posted on his website by others, and definitely can’t be responsible for material on external websites.

The problem lies when you find out that Nishimura pretty much ignores any court orders against him. Refusing to pay any money he has been ordered to be paid by the court system:

The reason why I don’t pay compensation is that I think I am not responsible for what others post … I’m just a manager of 2ch. I don’t feel guilty at all.

I’m pretty sure that you get out of paying fines just because you don’t feel guilty. I think that’s actually a sign of sociopathic behaviour. The sort of behaviour legal systems are supposed to discourage.

You look back on a few of responses, and they appear just as childish.

The other kids in the playground are just as bad, so why is poor 2ch being picked on.

The best quote is: “I have my own logic to justify what I’m doing.”

Best. defence. ever?