Qs people asked me on science and my replies to them - part 142

Q: Why touching others prohibited during death mourning period in India? Is any scientific reason behind this practice?
Krishna: 

During ancient times when people don't have any proper scientific understanding about germs, diseases and death, they used to fear diseases like contagious plague, TB, small pox, leprosy. It is certain death in those days when you get these diseases as they didn't have a treatment. So people started using some precautions like not touching the dead bodies, not visiting the places where the diseased body lied, or taking baths if you touch any family members of the deceased person because he or she might have come in contact with the germs and not visiting others after visiting the dead person and his family members, or washing and cleaning the house after the dead body is taken away.
We can understand that.

However, as the modern understanding of the diseases increased and we have cures for almost all infectious diseases ( yes, I know we still have some diseases like Ebola, Nipah, which we have no control on) we need not worry about these things any more.
Especially when somebody dies of a heart attack or a brain stroke, you need not fear about infections at all.

Q: What is the science behind ear piercing?

Susruta, the great Indian surgeon, advocated ear-piercing by saying that it prevents diseases like hernia and hydrocele. It is also believed that ear-piercing regulates the menstrual cycle in girls and prevents hysteria and other diseases. The flow of current in the human body is maintained by wearing earrings.

Is it a type of acupuncture therapy?

Krishna: There is no genuine science behind ear-piercing, only cultural and traditional reasons. There is no evidence for what Susruta said. Ear piercing doesn't stop any of the conditions you mentioned. 

Somebody told me when an ear 's pierced it would, quite naturally, become infected. Due to a complete lack of understanding, it was thought that the oozing pus was pressure being relieved from the eyeball. So that this treatment remained “effective”, a crude piece of string was threaded through the hole ensuring that re-infection would continue to occur. This gradually evolved from a piece of string into a metal ring that could be rotated (what we now call a “sleeper”).
 It was thought that acupressure or acupuncture at the correct point on the ear can be beneficial to eyesight. And oozing puss clears the eye!  

If it is based on acupuncture, it is not an evidence based fact. 

I am sorry to say this is not correct! When the wound created by the piercing gets infected, you get the puss, it is an infection and then a healing process not 'cleaning of eye'.

This is pseudo-science at its best. 

A medical doctor told me ... 'For a scientific tweak of mind, the ear's pinna (the outer portion you observe) is cartilaginous in nature, which are being devoid of any nerves and blood vessels in them. So, chances of sewer blood flow and pain are least.

Piercing is done by needle and  the hole needs to kept open all the time, unless, it will get closed because of the regenerative property of our skin.

 Infections due to piercing can cause significant tissue damage and perichondritis, inflammation of the connective tissue that surrounds the auricular cartilage. Damage from these conditions can be difficult for even the most skilled surgeons to treat.'

Ear piercing is done for beauty reasons and not from health point of view now.

Q: What is pseudo-science? And how does it harm us? Is it wrong to accept and follow pseudo-science?

Q: Why do you want to fight pseudo-science? Why can't you leave us alone? We have every right to believe whatever we want to believe!

Krishna: According to scientists, Pseudoscience is a system of claims that are not scientific, but merely pretend to be. They attempt to borrow from the intellectual credibility and cultural authority of science to prop up their views without doing any of the actual scientific work. Proponents of pseudoscience reject some aspects of modern science and promote their own skewed and twisted beliefs. This is often done by the application of denialist debating tactics. These are slick rhetorical tactics which involve obfuscating the basic science, quoting scientists out of context, conspiratorial thinking, confusing the scientific debate about details with a alleged debate of the validity of an entire field, the appeal to false balance and many other well-known techniques.

Against the destructive forces of unreason and crankery stands scientific skepticism. It is a method based on the rational and empirical evaluation of questionable claims by asking for evidence and using scientific knowledge. A skeptical approach often leads to the collapse of pseudoscientific claims and beliefs because of the lack of evidence for it or because the evidence contradicts it or both.

Some people think that accepting pseudoscience is not wrong. They ask: what if it is wrong? What is the harm, they say, in letting people believe what they want? While everyone has the right to his or her own beliefs, they cannot have their own facts. The promotion and spread of pseudoscience and denialism can have very harmful consequences. During the presidency of HIV/AIDS denialist Thabo Mbeki in South Africa, an estimated 330 000 people died earlier than they had to because Mbeki blocked access to antiretroviral medication and offered garlic and lemon instead. Alleged psychics exploit human grief in psychologically vulnerable people for money. Proponents of quackery peddle “treatments” that range from clinically ineffective to the outright dangerous. 

Some people rob you off your hard earned money with fake claims. You get cheated if you believe them.

You will get killed if you listen to quacks and alternative medicine practitioners.

Pseudo-science can harm and harm like hell. It can even kill people.

Now even after knowing all this should we keep quiet? NO, we can't As responsible people of science, we can't allow people to get into harm's way. We can't let people die.

So, our fighting against pseudo-science continues.