Creation Myths: what the argument that the iPad’s not for creating content … – Huffington Post (blog)

Posted on by

Globe and Mail
Creation Myths: what the argument that the iPad's not for creating content ...
Huffington Post (blog)
Keep in mind that all of those were created without an actual device to test on and were available on day one. I can't wait to see what's been built by day ...
iPad Etiquette: The 'Official' FAQWired News
Hands-On With the Apple iPad — and Your QuestionsWired News

all 6,309 news articles »

Looking for quackademic medicine in all the wrong places

Posted on by

One advantage of having a blog is that I can sometimes tap into the knowledge of my readers to help me out. As many readers know, a few of the SBM bloggers (myself included) will be appearing at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism (NECSS) on Saturday, April 17. Since the topic of our panel discussion is going to be the infiltration of quackademic medicine into medical academia, I thought that now would be a very good time for me to update my list of medical schools and academic medical centers in the U.S. and Canada that have embraced (or at least decided to tolerate) quackademic medicine in their midst. After all, the list is over two years old and hasn’t been updated.

My list is long past due for an update, and I want to post that update right here, either right before or right after NECSS. But I need your help. Please peruse the previous roll of shame. Then either post here in the comments or e-mail to me any examples of quackademic medical programs in the U.S. and Canada (I’ll leave Europe to others better qualified to deal with it) that I may have missed. Equally important, if there are programs I listed before that no longer peddle woo, let me know that too, so that I can investigate and decide if I should remove the program from my list.

I’m particularly interested in the most egregious examples (although your submitting all examples is greatly appreciated). Yoga and meditation don’t bother me that much, for example. Neither do dietary studies, because diet and exercise are science-based medicine that have all too often been coopted by purveyors of woo. Homeopathy and reiki, on the other hand, do bother me. A lot. I’m also particularly interested in educational programs in CAM that are funded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM).

Please help me construct the definitive list of academic programs in the U.S. and Canada that have adopted quackademic medicine.


[Slashdot]
[Digg]
[Reddit]
[del.icio.us]
[Facebook]
[Technorati]
[Google]
[StumbleUpon]

Your Own Private Island

Posted on by

dunbar-rockmsnbc recently published an article on how the average joe can get a luxury private island vacation on the treat. Here are some of the islands that they featured.

Dunbar Rock, Honduras
In the eastern corner of Honduras’s Bay Islands chain, the whitewashed, six-bedroom Villa at Dunbar Rock sits atop a 2,000-square-foot granite islet. Balconies encircle each of the three floors, and up to 12 guests can take in sweeping 20-mile views of the Caribbean on one side and, on the other, Guanaja island, an easy swim or 90-second boat ride away

Palagruza Island, Croatia
Two apartments in an 1875 lighthouse on an 104-acre island. Dinner is either something you bring over on the ferry or whatever the lighthouse keeper catches that day. Each apartment sleeps four. 011-385/1-2415-611, privateislandsonline.com, $233 per week.

Trinity Island, Ireland
A three-bedroom, solar-paneled lodge on a 150-acre island that’s a two-hour drive from Dublin. The island has the ruins of a 750-year-old monastery, as well as rowboats and canoes for guests to explore the interconnecting rivers and lakes of the island.

To see the full list of island that made it on the list visit msnbc

ReMix of Jon David’s Tea Party anthem – American Heart

Posted on by

“This should be our campaign theme song for 2010” - Andrew Breitbart

You've seen Jon David perform at the major Tea Party rallies, including Washington, DC and opening up for Sarah Palin in Nashville. Now, a new, updated version of Jon David's Monster Tea Party hit "American Heart" has just been released.

David is a diehard "Breitbartian" and writes a regular column for Bretibart's libertarian site BigGovernment.com.

From Jon's site:

It’s no secret that the majority of folks in the entertainment industry lean left. What is less well known is that Artists who don’t are often met with such contempt that their very livelihoods are threatened.

The industry responsible for setting the cultural tone in America, which keeps itself warm under the expansive blanket of free speech, has no issue attempting to silence the conservative voice within its ranks.

Hear the new Re-mix now at Jon's website AmericanHeart.com

You can also buy the song, and help a Soldier at the same time.

Editor's Note - Jon's song is the theme song for our occasional blog talk radio show "Libertarian Politics Live."

University of Michigan Medical School to be awarded largest grant ever – AnnArbor.com

Posted on by
University of Michigan Medical School to be awarded largest grant ever
AnnArbor.com
The University of Michigan Medical School is receiving its largest ever grant ever, administrators plan to announce Friday. Details on the amount of the ...
Saint Louis Company Helps The University of Michigan Medical School Connect ...St. Louis Post-Dispatch

all 2 news articles »

Virtual Cytology Catalog from i-Path

Posted on by
 

i-Path has a Virtual Catalogue of Cervical Cytology slides, compiled by Cytopathologists at the Royal Liverpool University Hospital

The catalogue comprises 200 cytology slides, each with case histories and pop-up diagnoses.   The slides are sorted by 7 diagnostic categories. 

Angela Wilson, i-Path’s Sales Manager says "i-Path’s Virtual Slide Catalogues are the perfect solution for pathology teaching departments who want to boost their existing content in specific areas of interest. 
Based on studies carried out by i-Path team members with Queen’s University, Belfast, regarding compression rates and when the human eye can detect a degradation in quality, i-Path’s slide scanning service scanned the glass slides in  21 layers at 1.5 micron intervals. 

"We are confident that cytologists and  pathologists will be impressed by the high quality images we offer in this Virtual Slide Catalogue."

View catalog

Miles of Sand, Sun, and Surf at Pescadero Beach in Baja California, Mexico

Posted on by

On the Pacific side of Mexico’s Baja California, in the tiny fishing village of Pescadero, a virtually undiscovered beach stretches for mile after mile. Fifteen minutes north lies the town of Todos Santos. Once a sleepy village, this artists enclave and its lovely beaches have long since been “discovered.” To the south are Cerritos and Cabo San Lucas, both overbuilt and overrun with tourists. But Pescadero is still just a handful of homes scattered across the high dunes behind the beach, many owned by U.S. and Canadian citizens. Aside from those residents, savvy local fishermen, and in-the-know surfers, this gorgeous strip of pristine sand is known to few.

Miles of beach sweep toward the northern point, a favorite surf break

Pescadero is not particularly welcoming to swimmers. The currents run strong on the Pacific side of Baja. But it offers up bounty for fishermen, whether surf casting or taking a boat offshore, and the northern point creates the kind of waves that surfers dream about. Much of the land is owned by one family, and they are in the process of building a palapa restaurant at the point, so the beach is bound to become more well known. But with the enormous expanse of sand that stretches from the southern end to the northern point, it will be many years before this beach is overrun or even the least bit crowded.

Surf fishing is popular with in-the-know locals

Day trips are great, but should you want to stick around for an extended time and drink in the serenity, there are numerous accommodation choices, ranging from a couple of upscale resorts to basic surf-shack-grab-a-hammock hostel operations. Pescadero is easily reached by car over good roads, or by bus from either La Paz or Cabo San Lucas.

Photo Credit: Barbara Weibel
Article by Barbara Weibel of Hole In The Donut Travels

American Heart – Why I Walk

Posted on by

Sherry WoodardAs a teenager, no one really wants to talk to their mother on the phone, and that was how I felt early Saturday morning on January 29, 1994, when my mother called me at a friend’s house. As I begrudgingly picked up the phone, my adolescent attitude gave way to a much more powerful emotion when I heard her say, “Sherry, Daddy died.”

I wish no one ever had to hear those words.

At the young age of 44, my father died of sudden cardiac arrest. I have now lived as much of my life without my father as I lived with him.

In November 2008, I stepped off the sidelines in the fight against heart disease and went to work for the American Heart Association. While the time I spent there often stirred up memories and emotions I once wanted to suppress, I knew that my efforts to help raise money for research, education and awareness might save another little girl’s daddy.

Sherry's Family

I miss my father. Everything is so different without him. I look back at pictures from my sister’s wedding, and while I remember how fantastic the day was, I also see the empty space he should have filled. I know that I am the woman I am today because of the short time I had him in my life, and that understanding impacts almost all of my decisions.

When I decided to change careers, coming to work at an organization that supports the community was important to me, so the fact that The Planet supports the community – and the AHA in particular – won me over. More than 16 years after I got that phone call, I am happy to be working with an amazing team that is also armed to fight cardiovascular disease.

Every year, I participate in the American Heart Association’s Start! Heart Walk, and because today is National Start Walking Day, I’m joining my coworkers in a brisk walk at lunch to get into gear.

I am challenging myself to walk 10,000 steps a day until November 7. If every one of The Planet’s 500 employees do the same, we’ll walk 1,085,000,000 steps – almost 22 laps around the globe.

I hope you’ll consider supporting our efforts to get moving, to raise money for the AHA, and most of all, that you’ll share your own story of how your life has been affected by heart disease.

Will you lace up your walking shoes?

-Sherry

StumbleUpon
Twitter
DZone
Digg
del.icio.us
Technorati

Our Visit with NCCAM

Posted on by

Over the past two plus years of the existence of Science-Based Medicine (SBM) we have been highly critical of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) – going so far as to call for it to be abolished. We are collectively concerned that the NCCAM primarily serves as a means for promoting unscientific medicine, and any useful research it funds can be handled by other centers at the NIH.

So we were a bit surprised when the current director of the NCCAM, Josephine Briggs, contacted us directly and asked for a face-to-face meeting to discuss our concerns.

That meeting took place this past Friday, April 2nd. David Gorski, Kimball Atwood and I met with Dr. Briggs, Deputy Director Dr. John Killen, Karin Lohman PhD (Director, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation) and Christy Thomsen (Director, Office of Communications and Public Liaison).

Dr. Briggs very graciously began the meeting by telling us that she and her staff have been reading SBM and they find our arguments to be cogent and serious. She shares many of our concerns, and feels that we are an important voice and are having an impact. She then essentially turned it over to us to discuss our primary concerns regarding the NCCAM.

We were prepared for this.

I first pointed out that many of our concerns deal with issues that are outside the purview of the NCCAM director (such as regulation) and therefore we would not bring them up but would rather stick to constructive feedback and concrete ways in which the NCCAM can better serve its mandate. These issues broke down as follows:

NCCAM1s

Left to right: David Gorski, John Killen, Steven Novella, Kimball Atwood, Josephine Briggs, Christy Thomsen, Karin Lohman

Ethical Concerns

The NCCAM faces particularly complex ethical issues in funding some clinical trials because of the very nature of the topics it is tasked to research – those with low plausibility that have been bypassed by mainstream research. The ethical guidelines of clinical research dictate that before subjecting a person to an experimental treatment, there is sufficient evidence for safety and plausibility of benefit from pre-clinical and animal studies. It might therefore be considered unethical to subject people to experimental treatments that are highly implausible.

The particular study that is most concerning is the TACT trial, and Kimball reviews the specific details of concern here. TACT is a trial of chelation therapy for heart disease. The concern is that chelation therapy is not a benign treatment and there already has been sufficient evidence to conclude that it does not work. Further study is therefore unethical.

Dr. Briggs acknowledged our concerns, but pointed out two things. First, this study came into being before her tenure at NCCAM (she became director on January 24th 2008). Second, the TACT trial has been turned over to NHLBI (National Heart Lung and Blood Institute), who now sponsors the trial, while the NCCAM still partly funds and collaborates on the trial.

What this means is that Dr. Briggs was able to decline to comment on the TACT trial on the grounds that it falls under the aegis of the NHLBI. This effectively cut off discussion on this topic, which is unfortunate.

This does bring up another issue – the NCCAM funds many studies along with other centers at the NIH, and (as with TACT) they intend to allow centers with the proper expertise to take the lead. NHLBI does heart studies, so they took over TACT. This is reasonable, but does have the consequences of effectively increasing the amount of research funding the NCCAM controls, and also provides cover (intended or not) for controversial studies like TACT.

Kimball intends to follow up with the NHLBI regarding TACT and will likely give us an update.

TACT aside, the ethical concerns remain and this is an issue we will have to follow with future studies.

Types of Studies funded by NCCAM

Another core issue we discussed is the fact that the NCCAM funds many studies that are designed to promote CAM in general or specific CAM modalities rather than study whether or not they are effective. Studying how CAM is used, or barriers to CAM acceptance – prior to demonstrating that any particular CAM modality actually works, is putting the cart before the horse.

But there is a more subtle and insidious problem. So-called pragmatic studies are trials that either compare different treatments or follow outcomes for one treatment in real-world practice. They are often not rigorously blinded nor are variables controlled. They are typically “intention to treat” trials where everyone is followed, regardless of whether or not they complied with the treatment.

Pragmatic studies are a very useful way of tracking real world outcomes. It may be true that aspirin reduces strokes and heart attacks, but what happens when a typical primary care doctor prescribes aspirin? Are their patients compliant? Do they run into side effects or other problems that cause them to stop taking the medication? What do primary docs have to do to improve compliance and minimize side effects? All good questions.

But such studies are simply not designed to answer the question – does aspirin work for the reduction of heart attacks and strokes. Efficacy trials are needed for that.

What we have observed in the CAM world, however, is that pragmatic trials are being performed on treatments that have no proven efficacy, and the outcomes are being misinterpreted and presented as evidence for efficacy. For some modalities, such as acupuncture, this is a very deliberate strategy and is being done in response to well-controlled efficacy trials that are negative.

We would therefore like to see NCCAM focus on efficacy trials, especially for treatments that do not already have proven efficacy. Pragmatic studies of unproven therapies are inappropriate and are ripe for abuse.

Dr. Briggs response on this issue was equivocal – she defended the utility of pragmatic studies but also acknowledged our concerns. We ran into the same problem in that, any examples of such behavior more than 2 years old were before Dr. Briggs time. So we will have to simply monitor things going forward.

Never Say Never

Related to the issue of what kinds of studies the NCCAM should fund is the following question – are there any treatment modalities that have been sufficiently shown to be both implausible and lacking in efficacy that the NCCAM should close the door on future research. When is enough enough?

We used our favorite example – homeopathy, which is especially pertinent following the report of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in the UK, who concluded that homeopathy is worthless, cannot possibly work, and should be abandoned in all ways.

It seems to us that the NCCAM (at least so far) has never closed the door on any modality, no matter how implausible and no matter how much evidence for lack of efficacy there is. This seems, if nothing else, like a waste of taxpayer money.

Dr. Briggs response was that in the last two years (under her directorship) the NCCAM has not funded any studies of homeopathy, which is true. However, they still accept applications for homeopathic research, but none have made it through the review process and been awarded funding.

This is a tricky issue. Dr. Briggs pointed out that it is not the job of the NCCAM to make final pronouncements about any treatment or medical claim. This is fair enough – but depends on context. The NCCAM is responsible for informing the public about so-called CAM modalities, and that should include a fair assessment of the science. If the science says a treatment is worthless, the NCCAM should not be afraid to say so.

Further, the NCCAM does determine what studies the NCCAM funds. The NCCAM accepts applications for research into homeopathy, but have not funded any in several years. What does this mean? Will they consider funding homeopathy research, and if so they are basically saying that they do not close the door on any medical modality, no matter how implausible or damned by negative evidence.

If they will not consider funding homeopathy, then why are they accepting grant applications for homeopathy research? This could be construed and disingenuous – perhaps a way to not fund homeopathy research without having to say they will not fund homeopathy research.

This leads directly to our final core point of concern.

NCCAM Information

The final major topic of discussion was the information that the NCCAM provides on its website, newsletter, and press releases. In my opinion this is the easiest problem for the NCCAM to address, and one that is completely and solely within their purview – the information they themselves publish.

We were armed with the latest NCCAM newsletter, in which Dr. Briggs is quoted as saying that “Science must be neutral.” Of course, we agree. But in the same newsletter there is article discussing the evidence for acupuncture and pain showing a model of chi and meridians – mystical life force and the lines through which they allegedly flow.

There is also an interview with a member of the NCCAM national advisory board, Xiaoming Tian, a Chinese Medical Doctor. In the article he states that he uses acupuncture to treat a variety of ailments (1. Chronic and acute pain, 2. Osteoarthritis, 3. Fibromyalgia, 4. Sports injuries, 5. Sciatica and neuralgia, 6. Automobile-accident injuries, 7. Autoimmune diseases, 8. Allergies and asthma, 9. Depression, anxiety, and stress, 10. Bell’s palsy and paralysis, 11. Skin rashes and eczema, 12. Side effects of chemotherapy and radiation therapy for cancer.)

The pattern of information is consistent – NCCAM staff talk about a strict adherence to evidence-based medicine and science being neutral, but interspersed with this is an uncritical presentation of ancient superstition as if it were science, and endorsement of treatments that are not backed by science, and in fact have been shown not to work.

It is my interpretation of the evidence that acupuncture has not been shown to work for any indication (as I have written before, the studies show it does not matter where you stick the needles or if you stick the needles, and any benefit appears to be due to placebo effects, artifact, and the non-specific effects of the ritual surrounding acupuncture – none of which constitute acupuncture itself). But I will acknowledge that there can be some reasonable disagreement about whether or not acupuncture is useful for some symptomatic treatment, like pain. The problem is that wishy-washy evidence for symptomatic benefit is then used to support the use of acupuncture for serious medical conditions, like nerve injury. It’s a classic bait and switch.

All of this confirms our worst fears about NCCAM – that its very existence, and the generally positive and uncritical information it provides to the public, is used to promote and endorse unscientific medical modalities.

In fact, it is not enough to be “neutral”, which could easily fall into the trap of false balance (balancing legitimate scientific evidence and analysis with pseudoscientific promotion). The neutrality of science means letting the chips fall where they may – fairly and honestly reporting the state of the evidence without pulling any punches, like the HCSTC did regarding homeopathy.

But it is my experience that the worst thing that the NCCAM will say about a treatment is that there is not “yet” evidence to support its use. The “yet” is often used, but when not it is implied. Almost invariably the lack of evidence leads to the conclusion that “more research is needed.”  What we don’t hear is that there is evidence for lack of efficacy, or a recommendation to not use a modality or to abandon further research.

Given that the CAM community is actively exploiting the existence of the NCCAM as an imprimatur of legitimacy, the NCCAM needs to take special care to avoid such exploitation. Meanwhile, it seems that they go out of their way to encourage such exploitation (although it seems just out of naivete) or at least make it easy.

We pointed out that we do not expect the NCCAM to engage in “debunking” (that’s our job). But we do expect that they are fair and do not give a free pass or special treatment to a modality because it’s CAM. That is the double standard we are frequently complaining about.

On a side note, Dr. Briggs did agree that anti-vaccine sentiments are common in the world of CAM and that the NCCAM can do more to combat this. Information countering anti-vaccine propaganda would be a welcome addition to the NCCAM site.

Conclusion

We greatly appreciate Dr. Briggs giving us the opportunity to voice our concerns to her and her staff directly. The meeting was overall very pleasant and constructive. We hope this will lead to an ongoing dialogue and as a result we can help the NCCAM evolve into a more science-based institution. Dr. Briggs did clearly voice her intention to make NCCAM a more rigorous scientific institution, in line with other centers at the NIH.

The one concrete result of the meeting was an offer to have experts from SBM review NCCAM material before it is published. We, of course, agreed to offer our services.

There continue to be very important issues and questions that are at a “higher level” than the NCCAM itself – such as the optimal regulation of medical products and practices, and also whether or not the public is best served by having a center of funding at the NIH which is organized around such a nebulous concept as CAM, rather than a disease or biological system. SBM will continue to address these issues head on.

But we are also happy to work with the NCCAM, and Dr. Briggs does profess her intention to move the NCCAM in a more rigorous scientific direction. We will see.

Addendum:

In response to my comment that NCCAM fails to condemn ineffective treatments, the following entry on the NCCAM site was pointed out: http://nccam.nih.gov/health/silver/

In which the NCCAM definitely states that colloidal silver does not work and is not safe. The wording of this entry (noting what the FDA states about colloidal silver) reminded my that Dr. Briggs did specifically mention that the NCCAM information is and will be in line with FDA positions on specific products.

To further clarify my statement – the NCCAM and even some CAM promoters in my experience will at times condemn specific products when there is evidence of harm, such as with colloidal silver. But this does not extend to treatment modalities, like homeopathy, acupuncture, or therapeutic touch, nor to mere lack of efficacy.

Further the threshold for negative conclusions about CAM modalities seems to follow a double standard, otherwise chelation for heart disease would never have made it past a review board.


[Slashdot]
[Digg]
[Reddit]
[del.icio.us]
[Facebook]
[Technorati]
[Google]
[StumbleUpon]

The Road To The Farm Is Paved With Lots Of Taxes

Posted on by

Guest Blogger For The Day: The Right Guy

I will be handling the posting duties for the next day while Eric is on special secret assignment. Below is an article from my blog.

Paul Volker, paper hanger and advisor to the mountebank in chief has told Obama that "we...need to consider a European-style value-added tax" in order to bring our deficits under control. This advice comes on the day England raised it's top tax bracket to 50% for people that £150K per year. That's $229K a year in the states. That's just income tax. The brits also have VAT and luxury taxes as well.

Well, what's good for the mother country, must be good for us, eh Paul? Did it ever occur to you to cut spending? A novel idea, eh?

Well, the farmers in DC are continuing to implement their farm animals in training plan on the citizens of the united states. You will see in the ensuing months, that Obama will trot out plan after plan pushing his progressive socialist agenda at a break neck pace to beat the November (Really January) deadline. Obamacare was just the start. We have the balloon floated for a VAT tax, Amnesty, Disarmament, Cap and Tax, FCC regulation of new media, and it goes on and on.

In 1765, England passed a Stamp Act which required that many printed materials in the colonies be produced on stamped paper produced in London and carrying an embossed revenue stamp. While the act was repealed a year later after many protests from the people, including the sons of liberty, many smaller taxes were levied thereafter in an effort to pay off the 7 years war (the national debt for England was £130,000,000). This precipitated the American Revolution. When will the people become aware that we are under the same threat we were 245 years ago? When will Obama learn that his actions have consequences? He is not a king, as much as he would like to be an absolute monarch. The yoke is coming my friends. Do you take it willingly or do you resist?

Thank you for reading this blog.

BOOM

Posted on by

“Boom”, indeed.

When we think of the Big Bang, we tend to think of it as an explosion in space.  That’s only natural; it fits in with what is familiar to us – what we know and can visualize.  But the Big Bang wasn’t an explosion IN space, it was an explosion OF space.  It is the origin of reality, the beginning of time and space.  It began about 13.3 to 13.9 billion years ago, and some scientists believe it continues to this day in the ever-expanding universe.  And of course, we know the expansion is still accelerating.

Big Bang Timeline, Image: NASA/JPL PD-USGov

While we cannot yet know for sure what occurred at the beginning of time and space, there has been some compelling evidence to support the Big Bang model.  Most scientists now agree that some form of “Big Bang” must have occurred.  If nothing else, hearts and minds were won over when spectral analysis of the cosmic microwave background radiation showed a blackbody curve.

While scientists cannot be sure of exactly what happened in the very early stages of the universe, they know something happened, and that it happened fast.  The current time line shows the Event occurring around 10(e)-35, and by 10(e)-6 the universe is shaped.  Now that’s 10(e)-35 and 10(e)-6 of a second.  That’s a tiny, tiny amount of time.  The basic elements formed within 3 seconds.  Within about 400 million years, stars and galaxies start to form.

Across Space and Time, Hubble ST Ultra Deep Field - NASA/JPL Hubble

There has been some discussion that on the “other side” of a black hole is a “white hole”, something that erupts out with matter and energy which has been consumed by the black hole.  This, in theory, creates “new” universes.  This is an interesting idea, but that’s about all it is at this stage.  While it seems to answer some questions, it asks more than it answers.

Scientist are now trying to answer the question of what came before the Big Bang.  According to Einstein’s theory of General Relativity, the Big Bang alone is mathematically nonsensical.  Enter Loop Quantum Gravity, which combines Einstein’s theory with quantum physics (equations which did not exist in Einstein’s day) to produce the Big Bounce Theory.  This is interesting, and considers the existence of a universe before ours.  Which collapses… causing a rebound… which gives rise to our universe.

It was once thought that the universe would expand until it slowly came to a stop, then either slowly come back on itself (the Big Crunch), or stay flung out in the far reaches of the universe until all the stars died (the Big Freeze).

There’s no computer program which can backtrack to show the location in space of the Big Bang, because before the Event, there was no space in which it could take place.

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the whole concept.  As I’ve said before, I’m suspicious of nice, simple scenarios which seem to answer *all* the questions.  I think that in a few thousand years (if we don’t bomb ourselves into Kibbles n Bits) we’ll find that the “final answer” is a combination of all the theories… working together.

Any ideas?