Scams and Near Scams

Prepaid cards: It seems like once a week network news comes along with the story of a person, usually elderly, who has lost money to a phone or Internet scam. 

They probably use the elderly as examples because they are closer to the age of the people who actually watch network news, but the fact is that they are not the most vulnerable. About a year ago a survey revealed that Millennials are more likely to become the victim of a scam artist than any other generation.

In any case, almost every time, their money disappeared by way of a prepaid card. They may have been informed of a relative in trouble or that they had won some money but had to pay a service charge to collect. The creativity of scammers is remarkable. The caller or e-mailer presented them with the problem and told them to buy and mail a prepaid card to handle the matter.

This should be a clear give-away, a red flag as big as their house, but scammers keep calling until they find a victim. Obvious defenses include not answering the phone unless you recognize the number. Valid callers can always leave a message; scammers rarely do. (This also works as a defense against telemarketers and robo-calls as I have mentioned previously.) Likewise the written return address on an email should correspond with the actual email address that shows up when the cursor moves over it. But the biggest warning sign is the request for a prepaid card. 

Toxins: In all my years of researching miracle drugs in the form of dietary supplements and other health products, I have yet to find one that lists detoxing or cleaning the body of toxins to be legitimate. They do not and cannot prove that there are toxins in the body that the body does not naturally and safely get rid of on its own. The science that debunks all these claims is consistent on that point.

Despite this easily available evidence, the products just keep on coming. They promise to detox your body and magically make you feel so much better. Their celebrity endorsers and satisfied customers back these claims. But always in the fine print at the bottom of the ad is the required paragraph about how none of these claims have been approved by the FDA and how the product is not meant to treat or cure any disease. I even commented a while ago on shoe inserts that somehow had detoxing qualities – by supposedly causing wearers to use the bathroom more often.

This is beyond crazy, but it remains a big business. Detox, like prepaid cards, should be a clear sign of a pending scam. In this case, however, customers can always convince themselves that they really do feel better, but they are still out the money for a product that relies on the power of suggestion rather than on the power of science or real medicine.

Science and the Game of Telephone: When youngsters play telephone, they sit on the floor in a line. The leader whispers a sentence in the ear of the first, who repeats what he’s heard to the second, and so on down the line. When the last person relates what she heard it often bears no resemblance to the initial message. It’s a common analogy for miscommunication, but I recently heard it to explain science reports.

A scientist writes a scholarly article about a real finding. Even if she includes all the possible flaws or conditions that still need to be investigated, by the time it becomes an article for a popular magazine may be downplayed. The next iteration, a short news or “health minute” segment, omits most details. Finally, it hits social media, where all subtlety is lost, but people like and repost without a second thought. 

For example, how many stories have we heard about whether or not breakfast is important? Is it OK to skip it? In 2012 it was declared optional. Around 2014 there were some studies saying skipping it leads to weight gain, and others saying it wouldn’t. One in August 2017 said how important breakfast was for kids. Last year, everyone in a particular study gained weight, but the breakfast eaters gained a little less. This year a study says skipping breakfast is bad for your heart. 

Which study are we to believe? – How about none of them until the scientists actually pin something down. Until then, the news media will continue to report each one that comes along as if it is the definitive answer and social media will keep us all “informed.”

This degradation of scientific findings as they pass down the “telephone line” is not really a scam, but it’s something to be very wary of. Unfortunately too few people research the validity of posts before passing them on.

Those Sore Muscles

Last time I discussed a book I hadn’t read, but based on a couple of reviews, I found some positive things to say about the advice it gave about taking responsibility. (I also threw in some snarky comment about the title.)

This time I want to discuss a book that I actually did read. Published quite recently, it’s called Good To Go, by Christie Ashwaunden. The subtitle is: What the athlete in all of us can learn from the strange science of recovery. It covers a variety of tools and techniques for physical recovery after participating in a sporting event or hard practice session. Examples are taken from professional athletes, Olympic-level competitors and serious sports enthusiasts. The book is an investigation of what works, what has real scientific backing vs. what is based on marketing, hype, and urban myth. It contains many surprises, but reinforces the need for critical thinking, the need to challenge our deeply held beliefs in everything we do.

The introduction states the problem clearly. “The explosion of recovery products and services can seem ridiculous.” Although “everyone intuitively knows what recovery is and how to achieve it,” the industry has found a way to make it much more complicated, expensive and time-consuming than it needs to be or ever has been.

Promoters of these new methods usually use stories rather than scientific facts, and stories told by celebrities or sports stars are most effective. The advertised science behind them is often based on poorly constructed studies with very small sample sizes. Only the ones with positive results see the light of day with the rest (often the majority) filed away. The book investigates many of these products and services to see what really works. I will cover just a few.

One such product with little scientific justification is the sports drink phenomenon, a huge industry with many devoted fans. One expert characterized some of their studies as verging on “comical.” The author takes on the whole idea of hydration, pre-hydration and electrolyte supplements and comes to the conclusion that the best defense against dehydration is to drink when you are thirsty. Any other approach can result in waste or even harm. 

She gives the example of running with her dog. When they get home, she gives her access to a water bowl. The dog decides whether or not to drink. The author has “never needed to inspect the color of the dog’s urine or give her an emergency IV for low fluid levels.” We make it overly complicated, yet hydrate is common advice from all sides every summer.

Similar advice goes for sports nutrition. She gives the example of Usain Bolt, the fastest man in the world, filling up on chicken nuggets during the Olympics. They may not have been the most nutritious meals, but “when your muscles are hungry for fuel, they don’t care where the energy comes from.... What should I eat after exercising? The easiest answer is: whatever your body is hungry for.” 

She also discusses the promotion of such ideas as infrared saunas, explaining that heat is heat, and any magical powers attributed to infrared, such as reducing inflammation, boosting growth hormones, clearing toxins or boosting the immune system are unsupported and have received negative attention from the FDA. Yet marketers and pro athletes push overpriced infrared saunas, cold lasers, massage beds and pajamas, based on the “sciency” sound of it all.

Subsequent chapters talk about sleep and supplements. Sleep is vital for recovery. Keep it uncomplicated; our body helps us figure out how much is enough. I have addressed the problems with supplements many times in the past. (See here and here). They are unregulated, can be dangerous and are poorly researched. They have a reverse approval process compared to prescription drugs. No one has to prove they are safe and effective. The FDA only gets involved when they prove to be harmful, as in the case of ephedra, where a hundred people died taking it to increase energy. “Yet it took the FDA ten years to ban it.”

There is much more to learn from this book. But I found it an excellent example of applied critical thinking with a host of interesting surprises.

The Miracle (?) of Homeopathy

One week ago I compared adults’ belief in psychic abilities to children’s belief in the Easter Bunny. But that is not the extent of these false notions. Another subject that adults love to believe in is miracle cures. It reflects a problem in the areas of discipline, not wanting to do the hard work or stick to a routine, and critical thinking, not wanting to accept evidence over stories. A good example of this is homeopathic medicines.

The theory dates back to the 1700s and is based on the idea that the body can be stimulated to cure itself by means of a like-cures-like reaction. In other words, substances that cause an adverse reaction in a healthy person can (supposedly) cause the body of a sick person to fight against the same condition.

Here is how WebMD explains it. “Red onion makes your eyes water. That’s why it’s used in homeopathic remedies for allergies.” Similarly, they may use poison ivy, white arsenic, crushed whole bees, and various herbs to evoke a beneficial effect.

“Homeopathic doctors weaken these ingredients by adding water or alcohol. Then they shake the mixture as part of a process called ‘potentization.’ They believe this step transfers the healing essence [from the ingredient to the liquid]. Homeopaths also believe that the lower the dose, the more powerful the medicine. In fact, many of these remedies [are so diluted that they] no longer contain any molecules of the original substance.”

The theory sounds a little like vaccinations where a small number of living or dead cells are injected to fire up the body’s immune system, but it’s not the same. Vaccines have something in them. Homeopathic medicines are diluted to the point where they contain only water, plus any contaminants the water carries. Therein lies the problem.

Last summer the FDA released a warning about one particular manufacturer saying, “Consumers and pets who use these products could have an increased risk of serious infection, that could require medical attention, due to the high levels of microbial contamination.” They warned three other companies for violations of (1) inadequate investigation of test results that found high levels of microorganisms, (2) lack of quality oversight of ingredients with potentially toxic effects, including snake venom, and (3) having insects in their ingredients.

The usual disclaimer applies to all these remedies: "Products labeled as homeopathic have not been approved by the FDA for any use and may not meet modern standards for safety, effectiveness and quality." 

It strains credibility that medicine containing not a single molecule of the active ingredient would be effective. The doctor who runs this site calls homeopathy “the ultimate fake,” giving a thorough explanation of his position. So if it does actually work, it must be a miracle. But what does the evidence show?

Here is a headline from Science Direct a few months ago: “A randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial comparing antibody responses to homeopathic and conventional vaccines in university students.” Their conclusions from this well designed experiment were four-fold: 

• Homeopathic vaccines failed to elicit an antibody response.
• The antibody response to homeopathic vaccines was similar to placebo.
• In contrast, conventional vaccines showed a robust response.
• These findings suggest homeopathic vaccines should not be licensed.

How does a half-billion-dollar industry react to these facts? They continue to promote their products as “a safe, gentle, and natural system of healing that works with your body to relieve symptoms, restore itself, and improve your overall health. It is extremely safe to use, even with very small children and pets, has none of the side effects of many traditional medications, is very affordable, is made from natural substances, and is FDA regulated.”

Add "holistic" and "alternative" to that sales pitch and people will ignore facts and fall all over themselves trying to obtain some magical relief! Of course, with nothing in it, it is safe and has  no side effects, except possibly from contamination the manufacturer has overlooked. Here’s an idea: skip the trip to the health food store and feed your children and pets tap water. It’s basically the same thing, but even safer. 

Here Comes the Easter Bunny

In a couple of days the Easter Bunny will visit homes of young children across America delivering baskets of treats. According to this source, the origin of the Easter Bunny may be traced to “early pagan celebrations” of “springtime renewal of life and fertility as well as the goddess of dawn and spring, Eastre." Some of these celebrations and myths were adopted and modified by early missionaries to make it easier to win over converts.

Like Santa Claus and the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny is soon relegated to the dustbin of childhood stories as kids grow up, mature and develop the ability to easily separate fantasy from reality, no matter how appealing and comforting those fantasies might be. Unfortunately, many of their parents persist in beliefs that are equally outlandish long after they have grown up. Somehow the will to believe is so strong that it defies reality.

I am reminded of this when I saw the recent Pew Research report on the number of Americans drawn to “New Age” beliefs, particularly that 41% of adults believe in psychics. Now, I’ve written about psychics before, giving examples of how their annual predictions are consistently wrong, how those who claim to have the psychic power have been discredited again and again, and how they have been convicted for defrauding people. But no matter how often someone explains the techniques of hot and cold readings, no matter how often psychics are embarrassed or proven wrong, the fantasy survives and believers continue to be swindled.

The latest attempt to dissuade believers (February 25) comes from this rather long (21-minute), but quite amusing video from John Oliver. The subtitle on YouTube is “Psychics may seem harmless and fun on TV, but they can make a lot of money by exploiting vulnerable people.” In fact, it’s a $2.2 billion industry. 

This video has had almost 7 million views, and you would think the word would get out. However, when you turn on daytime TV or use a search engine to find out more about psychic powers, people selling the idea that these powers are real overwhelmingly dominate the information posted. As is the case in most social media situations, misinformation overpowers the truth serving up enough credulous customers to keep about 100,000 self-employed psychics in business.

When magicians appear on the stage or on television, they describe what they do as illusions. They are admittedly lying to the audience, trying to fool everyone with misdirection and slight of hand. When the show is over, people go home understanding that it was all a trick but wondering how they did it – what mechanisms, mirrors, technology or fancy moves were involved? What didn’t I see?

When psychics appear, they expect everyone to believe that they can predict the future or can communicate with the dead. When the show is over, people go home, sometimes in shock or with renewed grief, thinking it was real. This is dishonest on the part of the performer and the height of gullibility on the part of the audience. They don’t try to figure out what tricks were involved. They believe!

That’s why magicians are so good at debunking psychics, but how many times will it take? And how will America survive when 4 out of 10 voters are so easily duped into believing in a notion no more real than the Easter Bunny. (Note: Politicians and the news media don’t call it illusion or misdirection either, although it sometimes is.)

People, People, People...

And now back to one of my favorite topics, Americans being duped by celebrities or celebrity endorsements into buying things they don’t need, things of little value or things that are potentially dangerous. On an individual basis it’s sad, and on a societal one it’s very discouraging.

If your car broke down, would you have it towed to the local TV station for the news anchor to look at – even if his or her hobby happened to be car repair? Probably not.

If your toilet backed up would you invite the local golf pro over to fix it – even if he had an engineering degree and an interest in plumbing? I don’t think so.

If you had a health question, would you seek advice from a Hollywood star instead of a health professional? The answer should be the same, but then how does Gwyneth Paltrow get away with it?

She holds health summits for her Goop brand charging $1500 per person, “despite repeated debunkings of her brand’s health claims, and piece after piece arguing the nonsense she sells is nothing more than snake oil.” This article comments on a new partnership with Netflix to push her products. In addition to her original lifestyle-and-wellness business, she owns a clothing manufacturer, a beauty company, an advertising hub, a publishing house, a podcast producer and several others. According to the New York Times, her brand is worth $250 million!

By playing on her celebrity status, Ms. Paltrow is reeling in customers by the boatload pedaling what many sources refer to at pseudoscience and misinformation. Errors in fashion may be OK; customers risk nothing more than possible derision. But when it comes to someone’s health, outcomes can reach beyond a waste of time and money to become dangerous or even fatal. 

Take for example one of the ten most read entries on the Goop site. “In consultation with Dr. Alejandro Junger, we created a week-long detox menu to recover from post-holiday indulgence.” Likely no one ever looked up the doctor’s credentials or questioned the efficacy of his advice before venturing into this experiment in self-medication. Unfortunately, as I’ve often written before in detail, detox plans are both unnecessary and dangerous. 

In other examples related to health, Goop continues a war on science with claims that are so outlandish that the whole thing could be mistaken for satire. But it’s not, and it’s very problematic. Dr. Timothy Caulfield, Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Alberta, is a frequent critic. “Assuming this isn’t performance art, the increasing popularity of companies like Goop is a cause for legitimate concern. Despite the best efforts of journalists and doctors, the debunkers are not winning the wellness war. Indeed, there is evidence that the trust people place in traditional sources of science is eroding.”

 Or as Vox put it just last summer, “Goop has been called out for bullshit over and over. But the brand seems to be stronger than ever.” Many agree that such opposition has just strengthened the brand among those already made suspicious of traditional medicine by so many other snake oil enterprises – basically appealing to those people who have sent their critical thinking on a long vacation.

It’s ironic that science brings us smart phones and the Internet so celebrities can use them to profit from the ignorance of people by selling and/or endorsing junk-science treatments and fake cures. It demonstrates the truth of what Isaac Asimov said many years ago: “The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”

A More Complex World Requires A Wiser Approach

A couple of years ago, CNN began an investigation based on a government mail fraud case against a Canadian company accused of processing payments for many rip-off artists from around the world with millions of victims in the US. “Many of the schemes are remarkably similar. They prey on the desperate, sick and elderly -- sending out letters that trick people into thinking they've won the lottery or found a psychic adviser who will turn their lives around.” Every year the scammers stole millions and laundered it through that company.

As follow up and as research for a book on the subject, they wanted to meet and interview a famous French psychic whose name is at the bottom of letters that appeared to be handwritten and personally signed. Addressed to the elderly, sick and lonely, "the letters promised that Maria Duval would use her powers as a world-renowned psychic to help solve their problems. They could recover from ailments, avoid terrible misfortune, win the lottery.” They only needed to send her money first. “At least 1.4 million Americans fell for the scam.”

To be convincing, the “letters contained personal details, like a recipient’s name, age or hometown” but this information is easily obtained on line. They bought mailing lists of people who would likely fall for such a scam. These people would then send in about $40 for each letter giving them guidance from the psychic along with lucky numbers and magic charms. The total collected in this one operation is estimated at over $200 million.

This continued for more than 20 years, but was only the tip of the iceberg. When they got an interview with the psychic, they found that she sold the rights to her name for a fraction of the proceeds. The psychic letter ploy along with other similar scams had become big business with professional copywriters and marketers scattered around the world and linked together by the Canadian payment processors.

It’s true that not enough Americans understand that psychic powers don’t exist. Those that can’t distinguish coincidence from the universe sending messages (or some such nonsense) are easily taken in. It’s true that some Americans don’t understand that you can never win a lottery that you haven’t bought a ticket for. But that’s not the main point.

There is a broader issue here. More sophisticated Americans, who scoff at the victims of these scams, follow fads and trends, are taken in by advertising for products of dubious value and respond with fear to manufactured crises. 

Their lack of critical thinking is evident and somewhat frightening. On one hand, they argue that climate change is real, based on the testimony of so many scientists. On the other, they will reject scientific consensus on many other subjects like the safety of genetic engineering, glyphosate (brand name Roundup) and irradiation of food. They will buy into the concept that locally grown and organic produce is always superior. They put their families on a gluten-free diet when there is no medical reason to do so. They believe there is something magical about sea salt. They put their faith in all sorts of untested dietary supplements. Experts warning against these actions are considered corporate shills or just mistaken. They buy products based on nothing more than endorsements from friends, strangers or celebrity spokespersons. They flock to purveyors of “secrets” that drug companies, doctors, credit card companies, Wall Street and the government “don’t want you to know.”

All this goes on as the world gets more complex every day. Incredibly fast communications bring real and false offers and threats. Advanced robots, AI and autonomous vehicles lurk in the near future, while hackers try to steal our identities and influence votes. Are Americans ready for the future? Behavior shows that today far too many are struggling, victims of scams and their own poor decisions.

Chiropractic - Handle With Care

Several months ago I noticed a couple of friends going to the chiropractor on a regular basis and tried to talk them into trying a yoga class instead.  They said they were too old and stiff for yoga, a typical response, and besides, Medicare paid for the chiropractor.  I wasn’t sure this was correct, but let it go.

Recently though, I ran across a fact sheet from the government and learned the following: “Spinal manipulation is a covered service under Medicare. However, maintenance care is not considered by Medicare to be medically reasonable and necessary, and is not reimbursable by Medicare. Only acute and chronic spinal manipulation services are considered active care and may, therefore, be reimbursable.”  It went on to define maintenance therapy, which sounded exactly like what my friends were getting.  Of course, I don’t have all the information and may be wrong, or the chiropractor may be violating the law.

From what I have read most chiropractors are honest and sincere.  They and their patients believe that treatment of subluxations in the spine provides relief from pain and other back problems.  Likewise Medicare recognizes subluxation as a problem that calls for medical attention.  But this in itself may be a problem.

One of many skeptical sources shares a different view.  “According to classical chiropractic, a ‘subluxation’ is a misalignment of the spine that allegedly interferes with nerve signals from the brain. However, there is no scientific evidence for spinal subluxations and none have ever been observed by medical practitioners such as orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, or radiologists. On May 25, 2010, The General Chiropractic Council (GCC), a UK-wide statutory body with regulatory powers, issued the following statement:  The chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex is an historical concept but it remains a theoretical model. It is not supported by any clinical research evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns.”  It’s like a metaphor that American professionals and  their patients take seriously.

Besides proper coding and billing, chiropractors must also be careful about the results they promise.  Some have advertised that spinal manipulation can improve general health, cure many different diseases, cure children of earaches, autism, and asthma, and prevent spinal degeneration.  None of these claims have any scientific backing.

Then there are the cases of unethical behavior like this one in Utah where the doctor was disciplined for financially abusing two patients and failing to cooperate with board investigations among other offenses.  But ethical failings happen in every profession.

In short, it is smart to be skeptical about the benefits of a visit to the chiropractor.  Maybe yoga, physical therapy or some other stretching routine will yield the same benefits.  Maybe most of the effect is placebo, based on a belief it will work.  All I know is that when I do a weekly review of medical articles, information about an investigation of problems with one chiropractor or another – ethics, false claims, and other problems – appears quite often.

(For a comprehensive scientific critique of the practice, see this YouTube video.  But I know many will read this or even view the video and still ignore facts that don't agree with a worldview they don't want to change.)

Greatest Hits

After 6 years and over 630 posts, it’s time to pick out some favorites. 

The objective of Real American Solutions is to demonstrate, using examples from the news or common experience, how most of the problems we stress about daily and most of those crises highlighted in the headlines are under our control.  Washington did not cause them, so attempts to solve them through government action often make them worse.  We are not overweight or unready for retirement because of some governmental failure.  No, most of the problems we have can be traced to behavioral errors on the part of individuals as they accumulate to societal trends, sometimes referred to by the media as epidemics.

Viewing the problems through the lens of behavior (in the five key dimensions shown above) gives a new perspective, a new set of solutions, a chance to fix what is wrong through individual actions.  One by one, as people come to understand the theory, seeing their own actions and decisions and those of others in this light, these crises and epidemics will fall away putting America back on the right track.  The idea that better outcomes don’t depend on the party in power should be refreshing to everyone.

So over the years I have given many examples of behavior in each of these dimensions not just to fix those particular problems, but to show how any unwise decision leads to undesired consequences and how they can be categorized into a dimension to simplify understanding and lead to improvements.  This can all be done without accusing others (or ourselves) of some character flaw or dastardly motive.  People make mistakes not because they are stupid or evil, but because they choose the wrong behavior (and face undesirable consequences).  To fix it, choose the opposite behavior next time – and watch out for other opportunities or traps that come up in the same dimension in the future.  (We do tend to make the same kinds of mistakes over and over.)

So here are some of my favorites.  Please check them out at your leisure.

How Much Consumer Protection tells about one of so many questionable products that could not possibly deliver what they claim.  

Another favorite example along the same lines is Performance Bracelets.  

Even back in 2014, before EVERYTHING became political, I was not impressed with the news we were getting.  As I explained in First and Fluffy, we deserve and should demand better.  

Just three years ago I wrote about the Retirement Crisis and followed up later with several explanations of how people misunderstand Social Security.

A favorite subject has been the tendency for people to blindly adopt views on health and good eating regardless of a lack of scientific support.  This includes the trend toward all natural, non-GMO and gluten-free.  Americans also spend billions on vitamins and supplements without understanding the dangers and lack of evidence to justify promises.

There are more than 600 other choices to help polish everyone’s appreciation of how to think about behavior to choose better options, avoid the name-calling and accusations and find Real Solutions.

Remember, the first step is to see the world as a set of behaviors.  Then figure out which ones lead to better results.  Repeat these, and for the rest do the opposite.  We can’t do anything about North Korea, but we can make sure our kids get a good education, that we pay our bills on time, that we disdain frivolous lawsuits, that we research health issues instead of following fads and rumors, that we don’t fall for every get rich or get thin quick scheme, that we quit trying to “keep up with the Jones,” that we live with gratitude and that we anticipate and avoid behaviors we will later regret.  If everyone takes these simple steps and encourages friends and family to do the same, there will be many fewer crises and epidemics on the news and America will begin moving in the right direction based on the behaviors of its people.

How Much Consumer Protection is Needed?

We would need a lot less consumer protection if consumers themselves spent more time thinking and researching and less time looking for easy answers and magical products.  Slowing down to think and research relates to the dimension of critical thinking, which promotes suspicion of those easy answers that are so tempting when discipline fails us.

Here is an example of the importance of those practices.  An Australian company is offering for $165 a product called a Geoclense Harmonizer.  (You can order a configuration that plugs into electrical outlets in the US.)  The name itself sounds healthy and friendly, but what does it do?  “The Geoclense is a negative charge resonance field generator designed to balance positive charge resonance otherwise known as noxious, unhealthy energy created by all forms of EMR, RF, Wi/Fi, Earth Radiation and Bioplasmic Radiation to a healthier negative charge resonance.”  That certainly sounds scientific.

The advertising goes on to list twenty-five individual types of "noxious energy" that you will be protected against.  Under the Bioplasmic or Human-generated energy category they include “Negative Psychic impressions/Psychic attacks.”  Under the General category, they include:  “Baby Monitors, Bluetooth Devices and Noxious Resonance from Mould and Fungus.”  You are also protected against stress from seismic faults and drinking water.  All you have to do is plug it into the wall.

Looking at this list, it’s hard to understand what dangers come from all these sources of supposed radiation.  Many tests have confirmed the safety of cell phones, so why would we fear Bluetooth devices or baby monitors?  Should people really worry about the negative psychic impressions floating around the house?  How does plugging a solid block of green plastic resin into the wall protect you from seismic faults, fungus, poor quality drinking water or any kind of radiation?  The website never explains how it works. 

The rest of the website uses testimonials and junk scientific “studies” to confirm the effectiveness.  We hear how people felt so much better after plugging it in and see through Kirlian photography how their aura is stronger.

A real scientific study from an Australian consumer review organization tells a different story.  The power of the Harmonizer is “based on the principles of 'orgonomy', which…was pioneered by Dr. Wilhelm Reich, an Austrian psychoanalyst who died while serving time for refusing to obey an injunction against selling quack medical devices.”  The review team tested the Harmonizer against seven of the company’s claims using simple tools such as a compass to detect the reported effect on the earth’s magnetic field.  In all cases except one it failed to show any effect at all.  Where it did live up to the company’s claim was the fact that “it uses absolutely no power. Hardly surprising for an inert lump of plastic, but it does beg the question as to why you need to plug it in at all.”

This product and others like it try to capitalize on public misperceptions like the fear of power lines that was popularized in the 1980s but has long since been debunked.  Even without the benefit of the above review, it takes a minimum of critical thinking, research and common sense to come to the right conclusion about such products.  We really don’t need the degree of consumer protection that Washington is always trying to enact and re-fund.  We just need a populace with better scientific understanding and a willingness to spend a little time to think it through.  Each $165 saved is an extra $165 toward paying off that mortgage or saving for retirement.