<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Good, Bad, and Bogus</title>
	
	<link>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com</link>
	<description>science and science journalism from Australia and the world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:35:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus" /><feedburner:info uri="commentsforgoodbadandbogus" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><item>
		<title>Comment on BOGUS: Today Tonight on Fish Oil, Weight Loss and Holograms by Antonio Shelvin</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/2_B1h8qh9FQ/</link>
		<dc:creator>Antonio Shelvin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 04:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=276#comment-573</guid>
		<description>I'll be sharing this info with my friends. Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll be sharing this info with my friends. Thanks!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/2_B1h8qh9FQ" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/bad-science/bogus-today-tonight-on-fish-oil-weight-loss-and-holograms/comment-page-1/#comment-573</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Pot causes psychosis? Not so fast… by Michael Slezak</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/WPIuwmjYPxo/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Slezak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:54:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=415#comment-566</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_comment"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_twitter_username"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_content"&gt;blog post: Pot causes psychosis? Not so fast... - http://tinyurl.com/yg9e669&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">blog post: Pot causes psychosis? Not so fast&#8230; &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yg9e669" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/yg9e669</a></span></span></span></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/WPIuwmjYPxo" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/bad-journalism/pot-causes-psychosis-not-so-fast/comment-page-1/#comment-566</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bogus science busting at New Matilda by Michael Slezak</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/GGNe8PYdaL4/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Slezak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=402#comment-550</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_comment"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_twitter_username"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_content"&gt;blog post: Bogus science busting at New Matilda - http://tinyurl.com/yd9r3t3&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">blog post: Bogus science busting at New Matilda &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yd9r3t3" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/yd9r3t3</a></span></span></span></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/GGNe8PYdaL4" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/bad-science/bogus-science-busting-at-new-matilda/comment-page-1/#comment-550</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Fish oil: Bogus or not? by re: health benefits of fish oils</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/Oiue2szPcpU/</link>
		<dc:creator>re: health benefits of fish oils</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 20:07:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=364#comment-524</guid>
		<description>There's no doubt that some anti-depressants can alter brain chemistry.  For some individuals where a chemical imbalance is the cause there may be a place for anti-depressant and anti-psychotic medications.  Individuals should have an omega 3 screening done to investigate if there is a need for supplementation of omega 3's through the use of fish oils.  These subgroups of patients may respond positively to adding fish oils to their diet.  Of course, there is also the problem of determining the appropriate dose that would bring their omega 3 levels to a more normal level.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s no doubt that some anti-depressants can alter brain chemistry.  For some individuals where a chemical imbalance is the cause there may be a place for anti-depressant and anti-psychotic medications.  Individuals should have an omega 3 screening done to investigate if there is a need for supplementation of omega 3&#8217;s through the use of fish oils.  These subgroups of patients may respond positively to adding fish oils to their diet.  Of course, there is also the problem of determining the appropriate dose that would bring their omega 3 levels to a more normal level.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/Oiue2szPcpU" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/bad-science/fish-oil-bogus-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-524</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on February’s going to be a bit slow here at GBnB by Michael Slezak</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/2LdQHauF_SU/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Slezak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=400#comment-497</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_comment"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_twitter_username"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_content"&gt;blog post: February's going to be a bit slow here at GBnB - http://tinyurl.com/yd9f6a3&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">blog post: February&#39;s going to be a bit slow here at GBnB &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/yd9f6a3" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/yd9f6a3</a></span></span></span></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/2LdQHauF_SU" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/bad-journalism/februarys-going-to-be-a-bit-slow-here-at-gbnb/comment-page-1/#comment-497</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on #Nuttsack: A scandal with a positive effect by David Lawson</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/KLKuyMTp0so/</link>
		<dc:creator>David Lawson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:07:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=211#comment-481</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_comment"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_twitter_username"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_content"&gt;@unstableisotope #nuttsack http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/nuttsack-a-scandal-with-a-positive-effect/&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">@unstableisotope #nuttsack <a href="http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/nuttsack-a-scandal-with-a-positive-effect/" rel="nofollow">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/nuttsack-a-scandal-with-a-positive-effect/</a></span></span></span></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/KLKuyMTp0so" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/nuttsack-a-scandal-with-a-positive-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-481</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the media. by Edward Mariyani-Squire</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/qMorGfsXIYY/</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward Mariyani-Squire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=374#comment-461</guid>
		<description>Certainly it depends on the responses to the questions - that is surely enough to say whether or not "that's the sort of response Mrs X gave [or would have given] before going into a coma". If one can say this, and we're &lt;strong&gt;still&lt;/strong&gt; going to doubt whether Mrs X is conscious or not, then why not (to me, absurdly) doubt whether she (and everyone else) was &lt;strong&gt;ever&lt;/strong&gt; conscious.

The rest is just a question of method: i.e., what sorts of questions are asked, how many are asked, how many options (in multiple choice style) are there to choose from, is she unassisted? Etc. One could still reasonably have doubts about Mrs X being conscious if, say, the response-options where binary (yes or no). For a large bank of questions, a machine will get 50% of them right. For a small bank - say, 6 questions - getting 83% right is not 'out of bounds'. If, however, even for a small bank of questions, where there were 10 options to choose from for each question so there was only a 10% chance of fluking it, one would start to feel more confident. The questions need not be about the patients life either. E.g.,

Question: What did you think of the movie 'Avatar'?
a) I liked it.
b) I hated it.
c) Strawberry jam.
d) It was seriously deficient in character development.
e) I am opposed to blue people, so draw your own conclusions about that.
f) ....
g) ....
h) ....
i) I've been in a coma for the last 5 years you idiot, so how could I possibly have seen it? What - you think I dragged myself down to the cinema on Saturday afternoon? How would I get in? I don't have any money on me. Hell, there aren't even pockets in this stupid gown they make me wear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Certainly it depends on the responses to the questions &#8211; that is surely enough to say whether or not &#8220;that&#8217;s the sort of response Mrs X gave [or would have given] before going into a coma&#8221;. If one can say this, and we&#8217;re <strong>still</strong> going to doubt whether Mrs X is conscious or not, then why not (to me, absurdly) doubt whether she (and everyone else) was <strong>ever</strong> conscious.</p>
<p>The rest is just a question of method: i.e., what sorts of questions are asked, how many are asked, how many options (in multiple choice style) are there to choose from, is she unassisted? Etc. One could still reasonably have doubts about Mrs X being conscious if, say, the response-options where binary (yes or no). For a large bank of questions, a machine will get 50% of them right. For a small bank &#8211; say, 6 questions &#8211; getting 83% right is not &#8216;out of bounds&#8217;. If, however, even for a small bank of questions, where there were 10 options to choose from for each question so there was only a 10% chance of fluking it, one would start to feel more confident. The questions need not be about the patients life either. E.g.,</p>
<p>Question: What did you think of the movie &#8216;Avatar&#8217;?<br />
a) I liked it.<br />
b) I hated it.<br />
c) Strawberry jam.<br />
d) It was seriously deficient in character development.<br />
e) I am opposed to blue people, so draw your own conclusions about that.<br />
f) &#8230;.<br />
g) &#8230;.<br />
h) &#8230;.<br />
i) I&#8217;ve been in a coma for the last 5 years you idiot, so how could I possibly have seen it? What &#8211; you think I dragged myself down to the cinema on Saturday afternoon? How would I get in? I don&#8217;t have any money on me. Hell, there aren&#8217;t even pockets in this stupid gown they make me wear.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/qMorGfsXIYY" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/can-unconscious-brains-think-coma-philosophy-of-mind-and-the-media/comment-page-1/#comment-461</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the media. by Peter</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/HhUmP7oTxkA/</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=374#comment-441</guid>
		<description>Richard, that sounds quite an obscure paper.  Is there a scanned copy of it anywhere?  Couldn't find it on JSTOR.  Thanks for mentioning it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard, that sounds quite an obscure paper.  Is there a scanned copy of it anywhere?  Couldn&#8217;t find it on JSTOR.  Thanks for mentioning it.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/HhUmP7oTxkA" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/can-unconscious-brains-think-coma-philosophy-of-mind-and-the-media/comment-page-1/#comment-441</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the media. by David Bortman</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/P0_X5LfVNoo/</link>
		<dc:creator>David Bortman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:05:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=374#comment-440</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_comment"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_twitter_username"&gt;&lt;span class="topsy_trackback_content"&gt;Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the ... http://bit.ly/cnKZAF&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the &#8230; <a href="http://bit.ly/cnKZAF" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/cnKZAF</a></span></span></span></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/P0_X5LfVNoo" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/can-unconscious-brains-think-coma-philosophy-of-mind-and-the-media/comment-page-1/#comment-440</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Can unconscious brains think? Coma, philosophy of mind, and the media. by Michael</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~3/2LkCLGGDbQc/</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 03:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/?p=374#comment-435</guid>
		<description>Richard - I think you're absolutely right! I'll have to check out that paper.

But to be fair to the other side, when we elicit responses from people (eg. people in a vegetative state), there might, in some cases, be questions as to whether those responses are conscious or involuntary. If the latter, it seems to make sense to say that they are unconscious responses of the brain. Perhaps asking that question is not making the mistake of attributing consciousness (or unconsciousness) to brains.

The type of cases that Ken is referring to seem to be borderline cases of this sort. You know, where someone's hemispheres are severed and you expose to one eye a card saying "leave the room". When they leave the room but are unable to explain why (or confabulate) it seems coherent to ask whether that was a conscious decision or not.

And thanks for putting me onto Ken's blog which I very much enjoy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard &#8211; I think you&#8217;re absolutely right! I&#8217;ll have to check out that paper.</p>
<p>But to be fair to the other side, when we elicit responses from people (eg. people in a vegetative state), there might, in some cases, be questions as to whether those responses are conscious or involuntary. If the latter, it seems to make sense to say that they are unconscious responses of the brain. Perhaps asking that question is not making the mistake of attributing consciousness (or unconsciousness) to brains.</p>
<p>The type of cases that Ken is referring to seem to be borderline cases of this sort. You know, where someone&#8217;s hemispheres are severed and you expose to one eye a card saying &#8220;leave the room&#8221;. When they leave the room but are unable to explain why (or confabulate) it seems coherent to ask whether that was a conscious decision or not.</p>
<p>And thanks for putting me onto Ken&#8217;s blog which I very much enjoy.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForGoodBadAndBogus/~4/2LkCLGGDbQc" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.goodbadandbogus.com/health/can-unconscious-brains-think-coma-philosophy-of-mind-and-the-media/comment-page-1/#comment-435</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
