10:23 – Why I Care

A few months ago, I was chatting to a friend of mine in a pub about a horrific story in the papers at the time about a very young girl who died of septicaemia from untreated eczema. I say “untreated”… her father was a homeopath.

It was around the same time we in the UK were hearing more horror stories, like “Baby P” and Madeleine McCann, so it tied in with a general child abuse theme that seemed to keep cropping up.

My friend and I were talking about how something needed to be done. Something that would get public attention, so that people would be given a balanced view of certain types of healthcare. After all, Simon and I knew that homeopathy doesn’t work beyond the placebo effect, everyone else should have the right to know too. Once the public are aware of different sides of the argument, it would enable them to choose whether they wanted magic water or a medicine that has been scientifically proven to work. In Gloria’s case, a bit of E45 or possibly hydrocortisone would have done the trick – I should know, I get eczema too.

A few weeks later, I was contacted by a lovely bloke called Andy, Simon had passed my details on to him. Andy oop North needed a Londoner to help out with organising a nationwide event to make the public aware of the quack that we call “homeopathy”. Naturally, I jumped at the chance. This is exactly what I had in mind.

Then in December, a major spokesperson for Boots (one of the leading pharmacists in the UK, a bit of an institution really!) announced that it didn’t matter to Boots that they know homeopathy doesn’t work, they were going to keep peddling it anyway! Hang on, yes, that’s right: homeopathic pills turn over a profit, therefore they’re going to keep selling it. And homeopaths accuse *me* of being big pharma shill!

The 10:23 campaign means such a lot to me, not because I’m big pharma (I’m not, incidentally. I’m an admin clerk for a fine arts company!) but because it’s something we should all care about.

Admittedly, I’ve taken Bach’s Remedy and Relief for exam stress and it worked. It worked even better if I took double the recommended dose. But as soon as I googled the ingredients and discovered it was all in my mind (and I’d failed one of my A-Levels) its effect completely stopped. Perhaps by taking away the belief in a dummy-medicine (placebo) I’m doing the world a disservice. Or perhaps you, me, Gloria, and the millions of HIV positive and AIDs sufferers in Africa deserve the right to an informed, evidence based decision about what goes into our bodies.

For more information about 10:23, and to take part, please visit our website.

Sins of Eve

I’m back! Thank you for all your suggestions for blog posts. Truth be told, most of them were crap. You can do much better, I’m sure of it. Send all queries to @UnfriendlyA on Twitter from now on, as my previous PA is a bit shagged out

In Genesis 2:17 (King James version), God makes it very clear that if anyone were to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they will surely die. Not probably, but surely:

2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

What purpose would it serve to threaten an uneducated, otherwise innocent person with death for the consumption of one particular type  of fruit, whilst the rest remained fit for human consumption? Were the apples poisonous? In which case, why put them there? Why put the tree there in plain view of two people who would have otherwise been quite happy with mangoes, pineapples, raspberries, kiwi fruits, bananas, lychees, pears, oranges, plum tomatoes etc had the devil not happened to be passing?

Why call it “The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” in the first place? Surely “God’s Apples: Hands Off” would have been sufficient? And if this fruit was out of bounds, why put the tree in the centre of the place you have built for these little naked humans? If I’ve learnt one thing from moving out of home into shared accomodation, it’s that anything you leave in shared areas is fair game for the rest of the house mates, with the possible exception of my toothbrush (I hope).

I can’t help but wonder that if the woman hadn’t been denied access to this sensitive, classified information – Knowledge of Good and Evil – would she have bothered eating it? If she had been taught the difference between right and wrong, and was granted some kind of context in order to be able to choose freely, would she have chosen:

3:16
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Subservience to a husband?

3:17
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

An ongoing sense of guilt?

3:18
Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

Stinging nettles?

3:19
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Decomposition of your lifeless corpse?

What kind of great, amazing god wouldn’t have seen this coming? I’ve heard so often how God has a plan, which we are too puny to understand. This plan’s been in the making for some time now according to the Bible, at least since the Babylonians have been styling their hair and performing complicated mathematical tasks for fun. Why didn’t he bother to draw up a plan of the world before making it and think “Oh me, I’d better move that bloody Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil before I end making more work for myself by systematically killing African babies for no good reason in 6000 years time from the fatal misinformation that my appointed representative on earth is spewing out at an unfathomable rate”?

I’ll tell you why: Whoever wrote this book, had no clue about narrative. The plot holes in this story are bigger than Jordans vayjayjay. My creative writing class teacher would laugh me out of the building for something like this. It’s the sort of story that the Farrely brothers would write, except they’d make it into a comedy in which God is the bumbling idiot. That so many have been raped, tortured, beaten, stoned, and murdered in its name is the real original sin.

In my interpretation of the events of this story, it doesn’t matter that the woman didn’t know any better, because she went and found out. Remember, God told her that she’d die if she ate the forbidden fruit. Yeah, in the long run, maybe, but not immediately. God was sort of ambiguous there. That’s one of the funny things about God, he never really says anything of use, sort of like a Tory politician. The devil, therefore, was right. They ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and took their first steps into skepticism.

Hiya, sorry I haven’t been blogging muc…

Memo to self: blog more ffs!

Unfriendly Atheist at it again

“Was the elephant man descended from monkeys?”
-Literally in Leicester

“Tis true my form is something odd,
But blaming me is blaming God.
Could I create myself anew,
I would not fail in pleasing you.
If I could reach from pole to pole,
Or grasp the ocean with a span,
I would be measured by the soul,
The mind’s the standard of the man.”

For those who don’t know, The Elephant Man, also known as Joseph Merrick (often wrongly called “John Merrick”) was a Victorian sideshow performer, infamous for his looks, but sadly not his charm.

There is still some speculation as to what he was afflicted with. Initially, it was thought to be Neurofibromatosis type 1, later studies suggested Proteus syndrome, although more recent DNA testing throws this theory into doubt. Other theories have suggested he may have been the love-child of Bono and Barbra Streisand, or that his existence itself can be attributed to something Big Al made up, and nobody ever dared to question him.

Whatever his uncommon affliction, it would not be uncommon in modern times to refer to him as having “a great personality”. By all accounts, this would appear to be the case. According to the oraculous Wikipedia, he enjoyed poetry and flower collecting, both rather fine hobbies, I think you’ll agree.

As far as current technology allows, Joseph Merrick Jr’s ancestors were all of the homosapien variety as far back as 1792. In answer to your question, “Literally in Leicester”, no.

It would appear that The Elephant Man is not descended from cercopithecoids (Old World monkey) or platyrrhines (New World monkey) but, like most humans, he is descended from apes.

Unfriendy Atheist at it again