This week we’re sandwiched between the March for [progressive favored] Science and the March for Global Warming, er, I mean, against Global Warming, er, I mean, whatever. It’s only the middle of the week so there’s plenty of time for more, but so far three science-related stories in the news have jumped out at me.
First, we have an example of a progressive politician acting as champion of consumers battling evil insurance companies who don’t want to pay for “naturopathic” medical care, because, science says there is no benefit to naturopathic treatments. Naturopathy focuses on diet, herbs and vitamins instead of science-based medical care.
From the Press Herald: Bill to guarantee insurance for Maine naturopaths is held for study. The anti-science champion here is state Senator Justin Chenette from Saco. The good news for pro-science Mainers is the fakery crowd didn’t prevail, at least not yet.
Bill sponsor Sen. Justin Chenette, a Saco Democrat, says the bill will likely be back for consideration in January. He says the state insurance bureau is going to evaluate the effectiveness of the bill and its impact on insurance companies and insurance customers.
Naturally though, the fakery faction has a lobby that stands to benefit financially if they do manage to prevail against the evil insurance (pro-science) faction. From thestate.com: Maine naturopaths rally behind bill to guarantee insurance.
Naturopaths in Maine are rallying behind a bill designed to prevent insurers from discriminating against health care providers who are licensed by the state.
Sen. Justin Chenette, a Saco Democrat, submitted the bill on behalf of the Maine Association of Naturopathic Doctors. Patients in Maine are being denied access to the licensed health care providers of their choice, he said.
Here’s a great article from StatNews about a licensed naturopath who has recanted her beliefs: ‘Essentially witchcraft’: A former naturopath takes on her colleagues.
“I’m trying to contextualize and call out the false and exaggerated claims,” she said. “They want to be able to do everything an MD wants to do — but they also want to practice essentially witchcraft.”
I don’t suppose there were any champions of naturopathic rights at the March for [progressive] Science, do you? (Irony alert.) Among those who are pushing for naturopathy to be covered by insurance and Medicare are lobbyists from dietary supplement makers. They’re in a whole ‘nuther category of science fakery, as are the vegans who rail against the consumption of meat.
To the rescue, the muscle-builders: Vegans Suck at Science. Here’s The Proof.
The 6 Biggest Lies About Eating Meat. And yes, my tongue is in my cheek, as I rely on a body-building group for nutritional advice, but they do have valid points about the value of eating meat protein.
If there’s one macronutrient you can’t overdo, it’s protein. And if there’s one type of protein you can’t go wrong with, it’s meat. Because despite what your vegan hipster coworker keeps telling you, animal protein is the best food for building and maintaining muscle, and it’s required for a long and healthy life.
The writers proceed to debunk several myths about meat causing disease, but of most interest to me was Myth 6: Meat Will Destroy the Environment Because of Cow Farts!
When in doubt, play the environment card, right hippies? This is exactly what Team Tofu does, claiming that cows produce 18% of all greenhouse gases and making statements like “meat production creates more greenhouse gases than all of the transportation in the world.”
Realistically, grazing animals do more pollution REDUCTION than creation. Unlike trains, automobiles, and the private jets environmental elitists fly when they give their speeches on saving the planet, cows contribute to the grasslands ability to absorb carbon. This actually helps prevent the release of nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide is something scientists believe to be far more damaging to the environment than carbon emissions.
Plus, any of the unbiased evidence on total methane contribution from cattle appears to suggest that this 18% value is more like 3%. And that’s if we’re talking conventionally raised cattle and ignore everything grazing animals can give back to the environment, like their ability to enrich the soil instead of destroying it like mono-crops, and nourish the population while surviving on rainfall and grass instead of irrigation and machinery.
In other words, pollution is increasing, water is decreasing, and soil is eroding because of crops, NOT cattle. If you cared that much about the environment, you’d stop buying wheat, corn, and soy, and start supporting local farms with grazing animals.
Which brings us back to the destination where all conversations about Science! seem to end up: climate change. But not just the cause and effect of greenhouse gases on global temperatures, you know, the actual science part of science. No, the real destination is the public policy part of Science!, you know, the regulations and mandates and market-skewing subsidies that will surely (or merely symbolically?) usher in a new, chillier era for human kind.
Watch this WSJ interview of former Obama administration undersecretary for energy Steven Koonin:
“What you saw coming out of the press releases about climate data, climate analysis, was, I’d say, misleading, sometimes just wrong,”
And guess what, the press officers were the ones massaging the news releases to make sure they had the proper spin. Among the topics where the public was being misled in the guise of Science! is the whole pipeline/tar sands controversy, Koonin said. That was his field, and he knew the scary stuff we were being told about “tar sands” was just wrong.
Koonin once asked NASA flack Gavin Schmidt why he should give credence to anything in the hyperbolic proclamations of former NASA flack Jim Hanson, to which Schmidt told him, well, “everyone has an agenda.”
So that’s what the coming March for Climate is about: everyone’s got an agenda.