disappointing, "health without pills" (Simon Singh & Edzard Ernst) from the perspective of the Carstens Foundation What makes Prof. Edzard Ernst GWUP.WATCH a theme? Quite simply, Edzard Ernst is the strictly dogmatic skeptics Association e. V. GWUP close ideologically. How does the article "Prof. Edzard Ernst: Agent provocateur of the complementary medicine research can read, there is a kind of symbiosis between the professor from Exeter and often to a group of religious fanatics reminiscent skeptics club from Roßdorf in Darmstadt. In a new series GWUP.WATCH should be checked once in this context, is assessed as Edzard Ernst of his scientific colleagues. 
, scientists are only human, thank God! It is with them not objective knowledge investigative machinery. No, scientists are driven by their subjective perspective, likes and dislikes as well as remote scientific interests. Because of this be interpreted as in the case of swine flu, or complementary medicine same facts by different scientific groups in different ways.
This is a good thing, because scientific knowledge gained is fed to a large extent motivated by the discussion of differing views within the scientific community. In view of the once happy polarizing and driving Edzard Ernst and can therefore valuable to be experienced, classify as science and research colleagues his work. The first one should now make the Karl and Veronica Carstens Foundation, which, like Edzard Ernst takes a strictly scientific approach itself, however often quite different conclusions than Edzard Ernst is.
The following review of the book cited
"healthy without pills - what can the alternative medicine?" of 17.03.2009 was by Dipl.-Stat. Rainer Lüdtke written. Rainer Lüdtke and Edzard Ernst, we find both in
Editorial Board of the journal Research in Complementary Medicine ". The critical words are thus a source that Edzard Ernst at the same level researches and publishes scientific.
Quoted from FOCUS POINT, Carstens-Stiftung, 17.03.2009: "Simon Singh, a physicist who understands is to make complicated scientific connections easily accessible and understandable to lay people, especially its ecstatic nature, scientific ideas to enrich small anecdotes. I'm as enthusiastic about his books
Fermat's Last Theorem and The Code Book
.
Edzard Ernst is a physician with a professor of complementary medicine in Exeter (UK), whose principal merit is to always recover, scientific principles of evidence-based medicine for complementary medicine. Also, Mr. Ernst, I met a brilliant orator, who spoke with wit and spirit of hard-to-digest foods.
So I have been glad to, as in the previous year, the book Trick or Treatment
was announced, a joint book by Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst, a book, now translated into German under the title
health without pills is published. And in fact read the book (the English and German version) light and fluffy, the number of fun anecdotes is amazing.
is content The book, however, rather disappointing. First, because it brings not just anecdotes and witticisms nothing new. All assessments and evaluations, if any, complementary medical treatment for now explained according to scientific criteria to be effective or may be exposed as a charlatan, you have already read in previous books by Edzard Ernst, for example in the Desktop Guide to Complementary
and Alternative Medicine (German: Practice naturopathy - Evidence-based complementary medicine), or the one published by the Stiftung Warentest
The other Medicine (where he is guided not as author but as a responsible physician and researcher). In other words,
The new book is essentially only the third or fourth infusion of known positions, but just to read something enjoyable. What in this book, particularly negative notice is the inability of the authors, the question of self-criticism, a characteristic that researchers should only just be our own. are missing the critical words about evidence-based medicine, a concept that has gained acceptance in conventional medicine, but neither remained there unchallenged is
( said, for example, recently Sir Michael D. Rawlins, chairman of the
National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK, of the view that evidence could pour into hierarchies is illusory.
"hierarchies are the randomized trial on an undeserved pedestal [...], although this technique has not only advantages but also disadvantages. Similarly, purely observational studies, error, but also have benefits." ) still in the restrictive form in which Edzard Ernst uses them, thought by the inventors.
Moreover, science is very controversial, whether certain techniques of evidence-based medicine (eg use of indices in which only double-blind studies, a high methodological quality get awarded, or the estimate transfer of general treatment effects in meta-analysis of highly heterogeneous studies) to the needs of complementary medicine can be. Here we have the two authors thus a little more humility required.
Nothing is as old as yesterday's news, tell newspaper people, and for science is like. Here, above all, because new findings suggest new conclusions. Now the German edition of the book is based accordingly to the published English edition a year ago, of course, the scientific results are already outdated at the time.
This is particularly the example of the leech clear: As early as 2008 was Singh's and Ernst's Rate is not more that it simply from a German research group studies are examining the effectiveness of leech therapy in osteoarthritis. 2009, this sentence is certainly not
is now made to be called independent replication of results, not noticed by the authors or unedited. same applies to the Alexander Technique: 2008, a very qualitative study clear effects that speak for the effectiveness of treatment for back pain.
Or acupuncture: 2009 was one of the touted by Singh and so serious Cochrane Collaboration published review article that a "real" acupuncture for tension headache has small but statistically significant effects compared to sham acupuncture. This allows for the Ernst and Singh again and again by shining basic hypothesis (though in this generality, not explicitly) that acupuncture is purely a placebo treatment, appear in a new light. Also because recently, there was an American group that even with equal clinical effects (ie pain relief) the processing of the signals in the brain in "real" and "sham" acupuncture are very different.
annoying also Edzard Ernst (or both authors, but I suspect that the lead at this point Mr. Ernst was)
has a clear tendency for their own research results in this book to be highlighted, however, the results others tend to ignore. When he quotes as meta-analysis on homeopathy, he occupied his mind with an analysis of his own group (eg for migraine and headache), and decided not to designate the positive counter-examples (eg childhood diarrhea).
Similar to a review paper on homeopathic Arnica montana: the conclusion is quoted in Ernst's analysis of 1998, the
more comprehensive and more recent work from 2005 is not mentioned (was me as the lead author of the recent study of course particularly annoying). Lacking in self awareness, it lacks at least not Mr. Ernst. So far, the invention of the telescope needles used in acupuncture research as a control system over the real skin piercing needles, researchers armed K. Berger and J. Park was attributed, according to which the respective needles are also named.
Mr. Ernst claimed the basic idea now, not for himself, otherwise than as a "thick head" (in the English version: "great mind") to present. The headings to the chapters promise Simon Singh and Edzard Ernst, the "truth about" homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic and herbal medicine. This somewhat measured approach failed in my opinion. Not only because it is such a thing as truth in this context probably does not exist, but because the entire book does not intended to approach the truth.
Here are operated prejudices, cherished, and since then it is also opportune to skip several pages about the fact that the results of a scientist (J. Benveniste) from a magician were not reproducible (note: I bashers). Singh and Ernst have formed an opinion that is complementary to almost all medical procedures: charlatanism. This can be done so they have good reasons for it. But there are many arguments opinion on this conflict. The book therefore as the definitive book on alternative medicine to emphasize, as promised by the English blurb is silly.
It remains a sobering realization: ultimately is not worth reading this book really is. I hope those I enthusiastically read books by Simon Singh prejudiced not related to health without pills. If not, I present to you the books to my heart. "
link to more reviews of the book" Healthy updated without pills "in the FAZ and the television station ORF
The 24 test participants confirmed our suspicion: The Surface is easy and intuitive to use. Whether young or old - the users have when interacting with the table fun. The test participants perceive the new service as pleasant and fascinating experience. In particular, the interaction of gestures and the recognition of real objects enthusiastic users. The gesture-based interface for users is absolutely no problem. Interactions such as turning, scroll or move giving no trouble. There were small uncertainties are only in the campaign "Scale. The reason: Some of the participants had to get used to it, to use two fingers. 
