The Australian Skeptics tell it like it is !

Send us a message!

We record live with Australian Skeptics to unpack wellness fads, anti‑vax myths, and why certainty beats nuance online. From onion cures to HPV wins, we share how to challenge claims with empathy, evidence, and clear language without feeding false balance.

• defining skepticism as open inquiry and testing claims
• why psychics and alt‑med thrive on confidence and scripts
• the language of wellness and the lure of certainty
• conflicts when sellers diagnose and sell supplements
• mind body spirit festival irony and real clinical care
• HPV vaccine success and countering anti‑vax tactics
• false equivalence in media and platforming
• who is truly holistic in healthcare and why
• ivermectin, appeal to nature, and big wellness economics
• practical critical thinking and audience fragmentation

You can find out more about this and future events at meetup.com forward slash ost skeptics

Support the show

Proudly sponsored by COUP — helping brands cut through the noise with bold, smart marketing. Visit the http://coup.co website or book a meeting with us at. https://go.oncehub.com/RequestMeeting

Episode Transcript

SPEAKER_04 (01:52):
Well, hello, smart women, and welcome back to the
Why Smart Women Podcast.
A week or so ago, I did arecording of the podcast in
conjunction with RichardSaunders from The Australian
Skeptics.
So he has the Skeptic Zonepodcast and I have this pod
podcast.
And we got together and we did alive recording of our melded

(02:17):
podcast, and it went very, verywell, and it was awesome.
And we had a really goodresponse from the um from the
audience, and I'm about to playthat for you.
But before I do, at the end ofthe um of the the panel
discussion, which was mainlyaround um alternate medicine and

(02:37):
the issues of misinformationbeing promulgated to the public,
um Lara Bennham, who wasconvening the evening, asked her
questions.
Um and what I'm about to playyou is and she very specifically
said, no statements, please, butwhat I'm about to play you is a

(03:00):
response from a very um angrywoman that had attended the
evening in the Occidental Hotelin Winiard in Sydney.
So I'm gonna play you herresponse to our our panel

(03:21):
discussion.
Here we go.
Enjoy.

SPEAKER_03 (03:24):
Yeah, so it is getting a little bit late, but
we do have time for a fewquestions if anyone has any.
If we can please keep it toactual questions, I'm sure
people will be happy to talk toyou afterwards if you have
statements.

SPEAKER_02 (03:35):
Hi, you mentioned um not wanting to give statements
to the media to, you know, denythe other side a platform, and
that you thought the media wasgetting the idea that um
anti-vaxxers were all crazy.
And you used the word corker atone point.
Um, well, I used to work atDaily Mail, and our editor did
in fact tell all the people atDaily Mail make anybody who

(03:56):
brings anti-vax stories to ournewspaper sound crazy.
And it was caught on video andit was released.
And I'd like to say that justlike every other journalist, I
always had the assumption thatpeople who were um complaining
about vaccines were also, youknow, a bit crazy and they're a
miracle of science.
But don't you think you shouldalso question your assumptions?

(04:17):
Because that was tested for 2.5months.
It's a medical product just likeany other.
And because we all had thatassumption, we silenced and
censored the voices of peoplewho are actually injured by mRNA
and DNA-based genetic vaccines.
And as a result of thatassumption, a lot of people were
injured and some people actuallydie.

(04:38):
So I think for you to sit upthere and be very self-satisfied
about crashing out the otherside.
The basis of science is toquestion assumptions and to base
your opinions on evidence.
It's not to silence the otherside.
What's your question?
A lot of people were vaccineinjured because of that
assumption, because media housesit's actually what you said.

(05:03):
Do you think that's a good idea?
Are you gonna do that in thefuture?
Make sure that you crush out theother side, you never examine
your assumptions.
Did you ever examine yourassumptions?
Did you ever read RFK's book?
Did you ever say nothing?
Because of that vaccine.
A lot of people died because ofthe mRNA and DNA genetic vaccine

(05:26):
that were repurposed genetictherapies if you bothered to
research it.
If you obviously haven't run themic, you don't have to yell,
it's all right.
Well, there's a doctor maybejust up the road, Professor
Robert Clancy, and he's justpublished a book on it, and he
pioneered immunology inAustralia.
He's an emeritus professor fromNewcastle University, he knows a

(05:49):
bit about immunology, and he'swritten about how the mRNA
vaccines have caused popularity.
Do you have a question?
Because you're making a why areyou so self-satisfied?
Why do you call other peoplecookers?
Why do you de-platform people?
This is not science.
You are a shame on skepticism.
You're not real skeptics.
I'm not sure.
And you know what?
I I crisp once we wipe T.

(06:11):
Carroll with the skepticdictionary in the 90s.
I blocked up my two picture withRichard Dawkins, so I won't be
told I'm a cooker by people likeyou.
You're a bloody disgrace toskepticism.

SPEAKER_01 (06:21):
I've been called worse.
Thank you.
Uh, the worst I was called wasan asshole on the pimple of
time, once a correspondent.
Any other questions?
Where we're at answer thequestion.
Uh the the the the answer to thequestion is there are some
people out there in theanti-vaccination brigade.
It's we struggle, earnestlystruggle to understand their

(06:44):
thinking.
It is often based on arrant,nonsense, magical thinking,
whimsy vaccines are a product,they're not a miracle.

SPEAKER_02 (06:54):
Okay, they're a product like a car is a product
or a bus is a product.
You're the magical thinker.
You think nothing can be wrongwith it because it's got the
magical word vaccines.
The genetic vaccines werepre-purpose gene therapies, and
they never think he can talkabout You're the reason my name

(07:21):
is a stink can't play sportbecause he's got a damaged
heart.
I'm the reason why your attitudegot into my news and we didn't
know.

SPEAKER_01 (07:32):
Uh yeah, in a minute.
Please use it.

SPEAKER_04 (07:38):
Please feel free to use it.

SPEAKER_01 (07:40):
I'm sure there's a podcast that we'd love to hear
from you.

SPEAKER_04 (07:42):
Yeah, there will be a lot of things.
Any other questions?
Any other questions that areactually questions?
Well, I hope you enjoyed that.
Um my favourite parts were whereit was um our fault that her
neighbour's child could nolonger um play sport because of

(08:03):
the vaccine.
That's our fault.
Um, the other thing I enjoyedwas that uh we live in
Australia, not the UnitedStates, but she'd asked if we
had read RFK's book.
Uh we have.
I wish I hadn't.
Um, but there seems to be um apositive understanding from the

(08:25):
people that promulgate theseideas that that people like RFK
um, whilst denigrating vaccines,are actively um selling and
promoting their own vitamins andminerals.
So there's always this a sort ofunderside to these so-called um
people that just deeply careabout the health of um of us and

(08:48):
our children.
And the other thing that Ireally enjoyed was the fact that
she'd apparently climbed MachuPicchu with Richard Dawkins, and
to the best of our knowledge,uh, we can't find any record of
that.
Anywho.
So that was that.
It's always interesting um tohear the voices of people who
were virulently um anti-vax andvery angry.

(09:12):
And my um son, who is uh asocial justice lawyer, did
attempt to sit down with her andhave a chat and um tried to sort
of understand where she wascoming from because it is
important that we try and findsome commonality, and um nothing
really was resolved by that.

(09:32):
Anyway, um, so you've heardthat, and here now is Richard
Saunders, um, myself, JessicaSinger, Kate Thompson, and Lara
Benham on the Skeptic Zone WhySmart Women Amalgamated Podcast.

(09:54):
Enjoy.

SPEAKER_03 (10:01):
Respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples with us today.
Before the formalities, uh alittle bit of housekeeping, we
have a whole stack of skepticmagazines over there by the bar.
They are free.
Please help yourself, pleasedistribute them to people.
Um, we are good we are recordingthis for the podcasts.
So when I say things, it wouldbe nice if people reacted

(10:22):
appropriately.
Um, but yeah, just give it yourbest shot.

SPEAKER_00 (10:27):
Yay!

SPEAKER_03 (10:28):
Yay, Lara! Woo! Wait a minute, hold that, hold that's
all.
Um welcome.
Welcome to the Occidental Hotelhere in the heart of downtown
Sydney, Australia, for a livepodcast recording in front of a
studio audience.

SPEAKER_00 (10:43):
Woo!

SPEAKER_03 (10:47):
I'm Lara Benham, and tonight we present not one, but
two of Australia's most popularpodcasts together on stage for
the first time.
No, it's always always one inevery audience.
Yes, yes, it's the Why SmartWoman Zone.
Please welcome from the WhySmart Woman podcast, Annie

(11:09):
McCubbick.

unknown (11:09):
Woo!

SPEAKER_03 (11:12):
Thank you.
I probably shouldn't reallycheer myself, should I?
Absolutely, you should cheeryourself.
Okay.
And from the skeptic zone,Richard Saunders.

unknown (11:20):
Cheer yourself.

SPEAKER_01 (11:22):
Thank you, thank you, thank you.

SPEAKER_03 (11:23):
Yes, yes.

SPEAKER_01 (11:23):
Hello, Richard.
Hello.

SPEAKER_04 (11:25):
Hello, great to see you here.

SPEAKER_01 (11:26):
We should be doing this woman.

SPEAKER_04 (11:27):
Okay, yeah, okay.
I'll try that again, shall I?
Hello, Richard.

SPEAKER_01 (11:30):
Can you hear us through that?
Yes.

SPEAKER_00 (11:32):
Yes, yes.

SPEAKER_04 (11:32):
Actually, can you hear us anyway because of my
actor's voice?
That's right.
Okay, good.

SPEAKER_01 (11:37):
Do we need this?

SPEAKER_04 (11:38):
Do we need it or can you just hear her?

SPEAKER_01 (11:40):
Or is that better?
If you're not out of anyoneonline, be on.
Yes.
Yes.

SPEAKER_04 (11:45):
But this is just especially for you people,
because we love you.

SPEAKER_01 (11:49):
You can always you can always yell out if if that's
not uh appropriate.
Hello, our Annie.
Great to see you here at theOccidental Hotel for the live
podcast recording.
Let's start off with Why SmartWomen.
What's it all about?

SPEAKER_04 (12:01):
Why Smart Women is a podcast that I created because I
was cranky.

unknown (12:07):
Yes.

SPEAKER_01 (12:07):
And that's pretty much it.
That's a good reason.
Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (12:10):
I was cranky at the misinformation and the general
crappy marketing that's pushedat women, um, that is not only
expensive but dangerous.
Ooh.
So I'd already written a coupleof books.
I'm going to plug my books now.
I'd already written a couple ofbooks on critical thinking, um,
which I thought I had to makecritical thinking funny because

(12:32):
most critical thinking books arewritten by men.
Nothing, you know, not castingaspersions on you.
I've written books, you know.
Okay.
All right, Richard.
He's written books.
Here we go.
Origami.
He's written books on origami.
All right, okay.
And anyway, uh as an a sort ofan addendum to that, I thought
I'm going to do a podcast thatis also countering the tsunami

(12:58):
of misinformation that isinformation.
That is aimed at women.
That makes sense.

SPEAKER_01 (13:02):
That'd be a good name for a podcast, wouldn't it?
The tsunami of misinformation.
Should I change the name?
You should.
You should.
And you said you're telling methat you're uh you you're almost
at 100 episodes.

SPEAKER_04 (13:11):
I am at 100 episodes.
I'm actually I'm at actually the102.
And and today I interviewed theSnake Gherkin, who is a very
good debunker of all thingspseudoscientific and Nazi.
We now have to include the factthat there's a Nazi presence
that's infiltrating the Cookermovement.

(13:33):
So yeah, that's me.
What about you, Richard?

SPEAKER_01 (13:35):
The Skeptic Zone podcast is well, let's see.
How long now?
Uh 896 episodes.

SPEAKER_04 (13:44):
Good Lord.
809.
And have you been at the helm ofall of those 896?

SPEAKER_01 (13:53):
I've been uh uh the early episodes had a co-host,
but I've always been the hostand producer of the show.
But you produce it yourself,whereas I have Harrison to
produce for me.
Ah, I guess I I'm uselesstechnically.
Um Well, but I came up to youruh studio not long ago, about a
month or two ago.
Yes.
Had a very nice recordingsession there.

SPEAKER_04 (14:11):
Yes, but I wasn't in charge of the recording, you
note.
Yes, that's right.
So what prompted you to startthe podcast?
Crankiness or something else?

SPEAKER_01 (14:18):
Uh fame, glory, of course, money.
Money, money.
Yeah, right.
Uh no, I I have been working onother little things like I did a
video vodcast for a while, wasabout skepticism, which was like
making a half-hour TV show everyweek.
That was just too much work.

(14:40):
And by the time I got to into itseriously, it was when podcasts
were really just taking off.
Yeah, yeah, you you were aforerunner of the whole
podcasting experience, weren'tyou?
It's interesting, interesting tonote that um there are four big
skeptical podcasts by why that Imean have longevity.
The Skeptic's Guide to theUniverse, Skeptoid, uh, the

(15:02):
Geologic Podcast are all olderthan mine and have more
episodes.
Wow.
So I'm the fourth in that thatlist.
But we're all within about ayear or so of the episode.

SPEAKER_04 (15:12):
And for my listeners, can you just I'm
sorry about the jingling.
That the issue is I have earson.
She's wearing ears, yes.
Wearing ears, and I'm I'm sorryabout the jingling.
I'm wearing antlers.
Anyway, Christmas antlers,because I'm in the spirit, sorry
about the table.
Can you please unpack the notionof scepticism?
Because I think it gets co-optedand repackaged for for um evil.

(15:37):
For evil.
Evil ends.

SPEAKER_01 (15:39):
Evil.

SPEAKER_04 (15:40):
Sorry?

SPEAKER_01 (15:41):
Re-packages cynicism.

SPEAKER_04 (15:42):
Yes, cynicism.
Exactly.
People can't somebody asked meonce if I went to skeptical um
conferences and just sat aroundbeing sarcastic.
I was like, yeah, that and Isaid, that's Tim Mendham.
That's Tim Mendem.
You've confused me for TimMendem.

SPEAKER_01 (15:57):
Skepticism is an open inquiry into, in our case,
it's its claims of theparanormal, the supernatural
things that are beyond the knownlaws of physics.
Uh that they're investigatedwith an open mind.
Does this claim stack up?
Now, after 25 years, personally,after 25 years, I I've reached,
you know, what I think arepretty firm conclusions about

(16:18):
various claims.
Like my experience.
Like what?
Anything to do with psychics,for example.
That's my special special.

SPEAKER_04 (16:25):
We don't like psychics.

SPEAKER_01 (16:26):
Uh so and you and people say, Oh, you bloody
armchair skeptics.
Well, okay, I've seen dozens ofthem in action.
I analyze their readings.
I'm in the middle of analysinguh uh hours of readings right
now.
So I sort of know what I'mtalking about.
You do know what you're talkingabout when it comes to this, and
other people in the movementhave their special fields.

(16:47):
We have people like uh IanBryce, who's here tonight, who
specializes in the physics.
So if someone comes along withan engine that says runs on
water or hot air or whatever, hecan analyse the physics.
That's his special we have uhSteve there.
Hi Steve! Hello, Steve.
Steve Roberts from Melbourne.

(17:11):
Steve Roberts uh specializes inUFOs, for example.
He knows a lot about UFOs.

SPEAKER_04 (17:16):
You fly one yourself or yeah.

SPEAKER_01 (17:20):
Uh and and so people come to us and say, well, what
about this?
And we can say, well, from ourlong experience, and the money
on it on offer.

SPEAKER_00 (17:31):
That's the UFO.

SPEAKER_01 (17:32):
That's the bar, isn't it?

SPEAKER_04 (17:33):
That's the bar.

SPEAKER_01 (17:34):
The money on offer has been on offer in one form or
another.

SPEAKER_04 (17:36):
What do you mean by the money?
Can you explain for this now?

SPEAKER_01 (17:39):
If someone can in fact that there are checks
flying around, I think, on atthe bar.
We have a hundred thousanddollar prize to anyone who can
prove a paranormal orsupernatural claim.
But James Randy, the year I wasborn, started this whole idea of
offering money.
And that was 60 years ago.
So we we we have reached certainconclusions based on just lots

(18:00):
of evidence, not based on usthinking, oh, I don't want
psychics to be real, go away.

SPEAKER_04 (18:05):
So why do you think in in the face of this you know
clear mountain of evidence that,for instance, psychics are a
bunk, why do you think they areso enduring?
Because I have friends that goto them constantly and I want to
actually lie down and die whenI'm gonna do it.

SPEAKER_01 (18:21):
It's a very thing, it's a it's hard to explain very
quickly, but unless the bestanalogy I can make is if you
know how a magician does a coinvanish or something or pulls a
rabbit out of the hat.
If you know how it's done, thenyou're not tricked, right?
If you don't know how it's done,you don't know the trickery, you
can be completely fooled andthink, did I just sit what's

(18:43):
going on?
I don't know what's going on.
The same thing with psychicreading.
You need to know the psychology,you need to know the tricks, you
need to know the interplates,the hot reading, the cold
reading.
Hot reading, the cold reading,uh what Susan Gerbeck in the
United States called motivatedsitters.

SPEAKER_04 (18:58):
Yeah, of course.
And we, of course, use motivatedreasoning and confirmation bias.

SPEAKER_01 (19:02):
So there's a lot to it.
There's a lot to it.
But that in a nutshell is, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (19:05):
Okay, okay.
Interesting, interesting.
All right, so are we going tointroduce I think so?

SPEAKER_01 (19:10):
It's uh it's bringing on, Lara.
Here's she, yes.

SPEAKER_03 (19:13):
Okay.
So it is time to introduce ourfirst guest for tonight.
It is pharmacist and skepticzone reporter Kate Thomas.

SPEAKER_04 (19:27):
And we should add in to the um skeptical inquiry that
we are now involved in is whatKate is currently doing.
Yes?
Yes.
Hello, Kate.
Now let's she's let's sit aroundcloser to this one.
She's tossing her Santa hataround.
Yeah.
Can you sit up?
In a very fetching manner.

SPEAKER_01 (19:47):
There we go.
So you have to speak into thatend that's okay.

SPEAKER_06 (19:53):
I'm ready.
Okay.
Hello.
Hello, Kate.
Yes, okay.
Hello, Kate.

SPEAKER_04 (19:58):
How are you?
I'm well, thanks.
How are you?
It is good to see you.
It's nice for skeptics.

SPEAKER_01 (20:05):
What what what's the what's the Kate Thomas story?

SPEAKER_04 (20:08):
Yeah, in a nutshell.
Be quick, interesting, andfunny.
Right.

SPEAKER_06 (20:13):
I'm a pharmacist, and I took to TikTok about four
months ago because I was amazedby the very sincere group of
people on TikTok telling me howI can cleanse myself of
parasites or um detoxed fromheavy metals or just things that

(20:35):
I never really knew I needed.
And and would just say them withsuch conviction.
Um, and a little bit like Annie,I just got a little bit cranky,
and did a debunking video and itgained some traction, and
there's nothing like positiveinformation to absolutely.

SPEAKER_04 (20:54):
What was the debunking video on specifically?

SPEAKER_06 (20:57):
It was um our favorite Barbara O'Neill who I
she's she's my favorite.
She just gives and gives thatwoman.
Um she was telling me how Icould cure my sore throat by
placing a raw onion on my.
Oh, onions! They're very onionsare like the cure for

(21:21):
everything, but don't eat themapparently.
Don't eat them.
No, you just place them on theon the place.
And I I just my logical mindjust went, but there's so much
between where the onion is andthe actual sore bit, which is
like back here.
And anyway, so I I did a videoand gained some traction and
yeah.

SPEAKER_01 (21:40):
But but she she has come up with extraordinary
claims.
Okay, so if your child happensto be running across the fields
and having some fun andaccidentally treads on a rusty
nail.

SPEAKER_04 (21:51):
Fine.

SPEAKER_01 (21:51):
Don't worry about that.
Tetanus.
Well.
No.
Oh no, you have to worry abouttetanus, but you don't go to the
doctor.
You put potatoes on their feet.
Oh, yes.
So vegetables are very key.

SPEAKER_04 (22:03):
Vegetables are good, actually, yeah.
Only estuples.

SPEAKER_06 (22:09):
She's got a great, I mean, she's the she's the K and
Pepper cures everything.
You know, you're having a heartattack, you've got no pulse,
you're not breathing, K andPepper.
Not not chest compressions.
I hear the emergency physicianlaughing over here.
Not chest compressions, K andPepper.
Anyway, so she launched mydebunking career.

SPEAKER_04 (22:28):
And I think um because I do follow you now and
say nice things and like you.
I am quite busy though, so Ican't follow you all the time.
I know.
So don't take a person likethat.
I call it stalking.
It's not stalking, Richard.
Um, so I really like this ideabecause it's one of my um um
things that I bang on about alot on the podcast, which is the

(22:49):
notion of wellness.
And that wellness has beenco-opted by alternative
medicine.
And I liked what you saidspecifically about time.
If you can just maybe unpackthat a bit because it's a very
interesting and salient point, Ithink, about this is one of one
of your recent TikToks, wasn'tit?

SPEAKER_01 (23:09):
Yeah.

SPEAKER_06 (23:09):
Yes, I think what you're referring to might be I
did a uh debunking video on um anaturopath who was um who was
claiming to be able to balanceyour hormones through her
services and was, um, to yourpoint, Annie, which was peddling

(23:33):
this message to women that theirhormones should be balanced
throughout their lives and thatif your hormones aren't
balanced, then you can suffer arange of different um because
they love the word balance.

SPEAKER_04 (23:47):
They love the word balance.
Balance is very, very prevalentin the bump, right?
It's ve they love the wordhormones.
Balance, balance, energy,energy, frequency, wellness.

SPEAKER_06 (23:58):
You can just generally sort of see how though
that kind of language would gaintraction with people who I guess
are looking for a fix to areally complicated problem.
Correct.
And I think that the the partthat the nuance that medicine

(24:19):
misses is it's it's thelanguage.
So medicine saying you're reallycomplicated and it's really
nuanced, and you know, commonthings happen commonly, so we're
gonna start here and then moveforward in this way.
Whereas the wellness industryuses really black and white

(24:39):
language that's reallycaptivating to people who
perhaps don't want to hear, oh,that sounds really complicated,
let's try this.
It's like, no, no, I can fixyour problems by managing your
gut biome or I mean somethinglike that.

SPEAKER_04 (24:55):
Yeah.
And I think there's so muchpromise.
There's a lot of promise.
There's a lot of promise.
And if I've got an issue and Idon't feel well, and someone's
telling me that's because myhormones are unbalanced and they
can fix my energy levels andthey know what it is.

SPEAKER_06 (25:09):
And I think the other very difficult thing that
happens in social media is thatthe um because we take a lot of
our cues socially from America,and America, I mean, they're
they're crazy to me.
I mean, in America, basicallyanybody can call themselves a

(25:29):
doctor, insofar as that you canbe a doctor of chiropractic or
you can be one here, can you?
Can you do it?
Can you be a DC here?
Yep, yeah.
Getting not a good idea.
So they're calling themselvesdoctors on social media and
speaking in this, in this way,um, it really draws people in.
And I and I I guess it doesn'tsit well with me that they are

(25:50):
they clearly understand thatdoctor is a very well-respected
title.

SPEAKER_04 (25:56):
Well, it's argument from authority.
So as soon as the brain hearsthe word doctor, then it
switches on, which this personknows what they're talking about
and they're going to fix me,right?

SPEAKER_06 (26:05):
That's right.
And and the other thing thatpeople don't seem so the
debunking video I did on thisnaturopath, I had I always get a
number of comments from eitherside.
So there's a whole bunch ofpeople saying, Thank goodness
you're finally calling thesepeople out.
I'm sick of all this rubbish.
And then there's a whole otherbunch of people who pile on and
say, health professionals don'twell, no, health professionals

(26:26):
don't get on social media andrubbish other health
professionals.
And I'm there going, Oh, falseequivalents.
But also, so you so she's not ahealth professional.
I'm a health professional.
She's not a health professional.

SPEAKER_04 (26:39):
She just made vague, weird promises about onions.

SPEAKER_06 (26:41):
But people don't.
I think people don't aboutonions.
People, the general populationdon't understand that
naturopaths aren't registered.
There's no governing body,there's no standard of
education, there's no Well,they're also in chemists.

SPEAKER_04 (26:56):
I I can you my local chemist?
There is a naturopath.

SPEAKER_01 (26:59):
There can be, yes.

SPEAKER_04 (27:00):
There's a naturopath waiting to talk to me about my
microbiome or something.

SPEAKER_06 (27:04):
No wonder that I mean no wonder people are
confused.
Of course they're confused.
And you could, I mean, I guessyou could easily also say, I
mean, it'd be fine if theystayed in their lane.
But my my my question to youwould be, then what lane is that
exactly?
So if we've got if they'restaying in their lane and their
lane is wellness and they'retalking to you about lifestyle,
well, we've already gotregistered dietitians who can
talk to you about that.

(27:24):
We've got physiotherapists whocan talk to you about physical
things.
We've got doctors who can talkto you about diagnosing medical
issues, we've got pharmacistswho can do it.
So what lane is that?
What lane are you in if you're anaturalist?

SPEAKER_04 (27:36):
That's the certainty lane.

SPEAKER_06 (27:37):
So don't be on that lane.

SPEAKER_04 (27:38):
They're in the certainty lane.

SPEAKER_01 (27:40):
You make a good point because they're all over
TikTok.
And they're all so Certain.
Certain.

SPEAKER_04 (27:46):
And medicine, you go to a doctor and you say, I don't
feel well.
And so they they will then lookat you and go, Well, at this
point, I don't know what's wrongwith you, but I'm going to run
some tests.
I'm going to run some tests, andmaybe the tests come back, and
they're still not sure.
So you're left in this sort ofuncertain place, which is
discomforting.

SPEAKER_00 (28:04):
It is.

SPEAKER_04 (28:05):
You go to a naturopath or some person, I
don't know, whatever they do,fix your energy or something
with some machine, and they go,Oh, I know what's wrong with
you.
You've got an imbalance.

SPEAKER_01 (28:13):
A kinesiologist.
An applied kinesiologist.

SPEAKER_04 (28:17):
An applied kinesiologist.
It's different, Kate, get withthe program.
Oh my god, what's wrong withyou?
Call yourself a professional.
Um so then I walk into theapplied kinesiologist or the
whatever, and they go, andthey're nice, and they're
probably warm, and they're goingto spend time with me.
Yeah.
And they're going to make apromise, and they're certain.

(28:39):
And the human brain, it lovescertainty.

SPEAKER_06 (28:42):
And it also loves people love it, they love
connection.
They also love time spentbecause nobody loves a topic
more than talking aboutthemselves.
They love it.
We all love it.
The poor old GPs are trying tofit all of this.
No, because I'm I've got themicrophone and I'm talking about
myself.
But GPs are trying to fit all ofthis into a 15-minute Medicare

(29:05):
rebated appointment.
Whereas your naturopath canspend hours and hours with
Hours.

SPEAKER_04 (29:12):
Hours with under cost.
Yeah.
At a cost.
And the no gluten and thesupplements and the no dairy.

SPEAKER_01 (29:19):
Supplements that the the I think the naturopath you
were referring to earlier, andforgive me if I face this way
because I'm uh trying to projectinto this one.
Uh there's a naturopath onlinewho gives this advice, and she's
sitting there in her office andbehind her books.
Uh no, bottles.
Bottles.
So bottles.
Endless bottles of who knowswhat, eye of newton, toad of

(29:41):
frog, and what is whatever itis.
And you made the great point onyour uh TikTok, but they not
only can tell you what's wrongwith you, but they can prescribe
on the spot and sell you thefish.

SPEAKER_06 (29:52):
Yeah, they can sell you the fish.
Which is appealing.
Right?
If you don't feel well.
Well, is it though?
So we we've spent a really,really long time in this country
separating the fact that doctorscan prescribe something but
can't get any kickback from anykind of treatment that they're
prescribing.
That's right.

SPEAKER_04 (30:12):
However, however, but if if for somebody who is
ill who is not exposed to any ofthe sort of debunking, you walk
in and they say to you you'regonna feel better.
And of course it's all anyhealth is scary.

SPEAKER_06 (30:25):
Yeah, and people I think are genuinely trying to do
the that people are trying to dothe best for themselves.
People are trying to do theirbest, they're just vulnerable.
Very vulnerable.
And then are to my mind beingtaken advantage of.
Well, they are.

SPEAKER_01 (30:41):
So have you had uh apart from the comments, and
I've seen those comments uhabout when you were talking
about the naturopath, have youhad much um negative uh
blowback?

SPEAKER_06 (30:51):
So I would say overwhelmingly people are very
positive to me.
And I wonder if it's because youtend to engage with things that
um confirm what you like andwhat you know, and you find your
own people on the internet.

(31:12):
So I wonder if it's peoplepeople see me now and they go,
Oh, that's right, I don't agreewith her.
I I don't even I'm not I'm notbothered to it.

SPEAKER_04 (31:19):
So she's in the algorithm bubble.
Is that what is that possible?
Is that what that is?
I don't know.
Possibly.

SPEAKER_06 (31:24):
Because I would I would say mostly either that or
I'm just not aware enough tonotice all these negative
comments.
But um I would sayoverwhelmingly people have been
very positive towards the.

SPEAKER_01 (31:37):
Well, there's that's nothing to be ashamed about, but
you certainly know when you'vehit a nerve.

SPEAKER_06 (31:41):
Yeah, well and I s and I hit a nerve with that um
with the one.
I'm blaming you, Richard.
You set me up for that.

SPEAKER_04 (31:49):
Thanks a lot.
Setting her up.

SPEAKER_01 (31:52):
I set her up.
I did.
I I I I forwarded to Kate thisnaturopath on TikTok and let the
release the crack.

SPEAKER_06 (31:59):
You didn't even he didn't even say anything.
He just dropped it like like aHave a look at this.

SPEAKER_01 (32:04):
That's what I mean.

SPEAKER_06 (32:05):
I'm just gonna leave this here.

SPEAKER_04 (32:05):
That's it.
I think the the thing that wetake away from it is there's
still so much work.
There's a lot of work that we inthis space have to do because
the cut it's really hard to getcut through.

SPEAKER_06 (32:18):
I have had a number of people though say, um,
especially on the BarbaraO'Neill videos.
Just maybe then just explain toall the listeners who Barbara
O'Neill is.
So Barbara O'Neill is anAustralian from the 70s.
She's been at this.

SPEAKER_04 (32:34):
She looks like she's from the 40s.

SPEAKER_06 (32:35):
She is.
And she um I think she started anursing degree but didn't finish
it.
So she actually has noqualifications whatsoever, but
has been prolific in this herbalwellness space to the point
where the HCC have put a ban onher speaking about anything to

(32:57):
do with healthcare in thiscountry, which is why she now
practices overseas, it appearsmore from Romania.

SPEAKER_04 (33:02):
So how come we get all the how come we get all the
TikToks and everything from herthen if she's banned?

SPEAKER_01 (33:07):
Because the internet is global.
Global, yeah.
Now she also won this year's BenSpoon Award, Barbara O'Neill.
Bless Barbara.
Bless Barbara.
That's beautiful.
But I mean when you I mean YayBarbara.
But when we're talking aboutthis sort of reach, I I'm just
using TikTok as the primeexample.
Because it's, you know, a lot ofpeople are now on TikTok until

(33:30):
they're not, until the next bestthing comes along.
But if unfortunately, I I'vestarted to comment on on things
that I think are a bit dodgy.
So what's my TikTok feed full ofthings that I find dodgy?

SPEAKER_04 (33:42):
Yeah, yeah.
Okay, right.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
There's a I I just we there's alot of work to do.
There is, but we have to keepdoing it.
Yeah.
And I hope you get your ownpodcast up because your voice is
very important.

SPEAKER_00 (33:55):
Oh, thanks.

SPEAKER_04 (33:56):
I I don't.
She's our latest reporter.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
That's right.
Get lost, Tate.

SPEAKER_02 (34:02):
Oh, thanks for having me.
That's our pleasure.
It's our absolute pleasure.

SPEAKER_01 (34:07):
All right.
Well, for the for for right now,ladies and gentlemen.

SPEAKER_03 (34:15):
It is now time to introduce our next guest for the
evening.
It is Skeptic and EmergencyPhysician Sue Durant.

unknown (34:22):
Yay!

SPEAKER_01 (34:28):
For those of you listening, this is quite a feat
to get up to the stage and I'veum just done some contortions to
follow my way to the mic.

SPEAKER_05 (34:36):
Well done.
And you've got a very fetchingChristmas hat on.
I have a Christmas hat thatworks really well on podcasts.

SPEAKER_01 (34:43):
Now, Kate, uh, if you want to chip in and chime
in, you can direct your commentsinto the blue microphone over
there.
That'll be great.
Hello, Sue.

SPEAKER_05 (34:51):
Hello, Richard.
It's nice to have you.
Hi, Annie.

SPEAKER_01 (34:53):
Hello, Sue.
And in fact, you and I, Annie,were uh going to chat.
We sort of ran out of time atthe top of the show about Mind
Body Wallet.

SPEAKER_05 (35:01):
Yes, I have been have made the odd appearance
there.

SPEAKER_04 (35:05):
So the my um what Richard is disparagingly
referring to as the Mind BodyWallet Festival is the Mind Body
Spirit Festival, um, which I wasdragged along to um by Richard
and and um Kate recently, and itwas d devastatingly tiring, and
I had to be scraped up off thefloor after about 20 minutes

(35:26):
from the shop.
But we we scraped you off thefloor and you kept going.
I did.
I'm a heroic.
Yes.
I'm absolutely heroic.
But apparently Sue ghosts them alot.
I've only been twice.
Can you explain what they are?
A Mind Body Spirit Festival?

SPEAKER_05 (35:40):
They're basically trade shows for woo-woo.
And what makes them entertainingfor me is that there is a
mixture of um pseudoscientificproducts and pseudo healthcare
and pseudo-psychics, but there'salso an interesting amount of um

(36:02):
art and craft and clothing,which always keeps me
interested.

SPEAKER_04 (36:05):
Well, we took Kate along with us to the last one,
and and she was given the that'svery attractive.
She's wearing a t-shirt thatsays heavily meditated.
Anyway, I'll leave you withthat.

SPEAKER_01 (36:16):
You should be so um Medicated.
It's a joke.

SPEAKER_04 (36:21):
I know it's a oh thanks, Richard.

SPEAKER_01 (36:25):
I can't work under these conditions.

SPEAKER_04 (36:26):
No, you don't, you shouldn't have to.

SPEAKER_05 (36:28):
Um should I tell the adventure that we had?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (36:31):
Well, I do, but I just want to, before you do
that, if I can just um revisitthe moment where Kate was told
with great confidence andcertainty that she had no stem
cells.
And that was very problematic.
She's too sad to talk now, lookat that.

SPEAKER_06 (36:48):
Yeah, just I couldn't believe it.
He looked at me and he looked atme and said, I can tell you've
got no stem cells.

SPEAKER_04 (36:54):
Yeah, you could tell as soon as I met you, I knew
that.

SPEAKER_05 (36:58):
It's a bit rude.
It's just I thought you justread it on the front of a
t-shirt.

SPEAKER_04 (37:03):
And and but there uh fortunately there was something
that he could sell you thatwould ameliorate the lack of
stem cell issue.

SPEAKER_05 (37:10):
There was a there was a patch.
Wasn't that a coincidence thathe could both diagnose and sell
the patch?
And so quickly.

SPEAKER_04 (37:18):
And so quickly, yes.

SPEAKER_05 (37:19):
So quickly.

SPEAKER_04 (37:20):
And so quickly.
So sorry, Sue, I've interruptedwith my own.

SPEAKER_05 (37:24):
Well, there was an adventure on um the day that I
attended the festival.
A young woman who was touringthe festival with her mother
collapsed to the ground.
In the in front of all thecells.
No stem cells or no stem cells.
In front of all the alternativehealers.
Is that true?
Who do you think they calledfor?

SPEAKER_02 (37:43):
Okay.

SPEAKER_05 (37:45):
Is that actually they actually went running to
look for a doctor?
Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 (37:50):
Well, so so uh I was uh with Sue and our friend Tim
Ferguson, and we were lookingaround.
Uh Sue went off uh to look at auh a magic wand, or I don't know
what you're looking at, and Iwas there chatting to somebody,
and suddenly out of the cornerof my eye, there was a
commotion.
I went over, and this poor younglady was on the ground, sort of
not knowing where she was, andpeople were worried.

(38:11):
And I said to somebody, Wouldyou like me to get a doctor?
Or a homeopath.
And they said to me, Yes, yes,and I ran and Sue, I dragged,
come back, and I said the ironyis in a room full of homeopaths,
Reiki healers, mystics, auramanipulators, they needed
patches patches.
They needed a doctor.

SPEAKER_04 (38:32):
They needed a doctor.

SPEAKER_00 (38:33):
Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (38:33):
And do you think that irony actually was lost on
them?

SPEAKER_05 (38:37):
I don't think it landed.

SPEAKER_00 (38:39):
Yeah.

SPEAKER_05 (38:39):
It um it's only a couple of us who found it
amusing.

SPEAKER_04 (38:43):
What did you have to do for her?

SPEAKER_05 (38:46):
Reassure her and help her to get up without
people making too much fuss.
Right.

SPEAKER_01 (38:51):
Yeah.
What she was uh he she was.
I think she ate a crystal orsomething, my penny.

SPEAKER_05 (38:57):
I think she her frequencies were unbalanced.
Yeah, I thought that.
Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 (39:01):
That will do it every time.

SPEAKER_04 (39:03):
Yeah, every time if you're not.

SPEAKER_01 (39:04):
That's why you've got no stem cells.

SPEAKER_04 (39:06):
Your frequencies are unbalanced.
Yeah, there's a patch for that.
It's okay, relax.

SPEAKER_01 (39:10):
Now let's uh quickly, there's a talking point
that I I put in the runningorder here, which was really
interesting.
There was a news item the otherday, uh, and I I I assume you
would have seen that one.
About uh no women aged under 25were diagnosed with cervical
cancer in Australia in 2021.

(39:30):
Which means the Gardasil vaccineis spectacularly successful.
Uh, but there are still peopleout there claiming it it is uh
an agent of evil, it is killingpeople.
But look at the results.
Yeah, it's a style of circular.

SPEAKER_05 (39:46):
And this is an area of real interest to me because
it was originally the anti-vaxorganization, the AVN, that got
me interested in counteringanti-vax information and got me
into this community area.

SPEAKER_04 (40:00):
So just to explain, the AVN um is the um misnamed.

SPEAKER_05 (40:07):
Australian Vaccination Network.

SPEAKER_01 (40:10):
Now they call themselves the Australian
Vaccination Risks Network for awhile.
They they really hated us, theAustralian skeptics, so they
called themselves the AustralianVaccination Skeptics Network for
a while.
Whoa.
Whoa.
Come on, what's it?

SPEAKER_04 (40:25):
And what they do is they they promulgate these um
very serious anti-vax messages,do they not?
As soon as this this came up onthe media about the eradication
of cervical cancer, somebodyjust put lies.
Uh lies, yeah.

SPEAKER_05 (40:42):
Well, it it's interesting that because that
was my first entry into thisworld, I've kept a close eye on
anti-vaccination culture allaround the world for quite a few
years now.
And Gardasil was a veryinteresting situation in that it
was about young women andpromiscuity.

(41:03):
And so there was this wholemoral outrage that surrounded
the vaccine.
And I don't know how many peoplehave seen the YouTubes of very
weird reactions in youngAmerican women who started to
walk backwards or shake one arm,or there were very bizarre
psychologically mediatedresponses in a lot of young

(41:25):
women.
Walking backwards.
That was a famous example, yes.
Until the person was found atthe shopping centre actually
walking back, walking forwards.
Ordering a latte.

SPEAKER_01 (41:36):
It's like the people who claim that they could live
on only air being caught comingout of McDonald's.
That's right.

SPEAKER_02 (41:42):
Exactly.

SPEAKER_05 (41:43):
So one of the other great things about HPV vaccine
is it's an Aussie vaccine.
It was our own um scientist whodeveloped it.
And Australian teenagers are waytoo savvy to go fainting and
walking backwards.
In fact, most Australianteenagers have taken HPV vaccine
without turning a hair.
What about the boys?

(42:05):
Well, it obviously the boys arethe vector of transmission.
So um Australia decided fairlyearly on that all teenagers now,
including boys, are vaccinated.

SPEAKER_01 (42:16):
Great idea.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Well the proof is in theresults.
That's right.
Absolutely, yeah.

SPEAKER_05 (42:21):
So that's it is a real achievement.

SPEAKER_04 (42:24):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
And it's interesting that ofcourse it's going to be the
right, you know, the right ofpolitics that is going to resist
these things because what theywant is virginal pure girls,
right?

SPEAKER_05 (42:36):
And that's why the moral outrage was particularly
strong in the States, becausethey've got that conservative
religious culture.
Yeah, we have Australians beingso much more pragmatic.
Yeah.
We have a little of it, but Idon't think it's as exaggerated.

SPEAKER_01 (42:51):
Now the other the other point, and uh Kate, please
ch chime in on this one too, isjust for our audience, an
understanding.
We hear this all the time fromthe Alt Med practitioners,
especially the naturopaths.
They say they are holistic uhhealers.
They look at the whole body, notjust the symptoms.

(43:11):
And I know you've had a uhTikTok on this the other day, I
think.

SPEAKER_06 (43:15):
Ah, I did a TikTok on it because I was really just
saying that I think that GPswere the pioneers of holistic
care, really.
They're the ones that know yourpet's name and your allergies
and your blood pressure and youryou know, they they really are
looking at the whole person, andI'm just not sure how that

(43:37):
messaging hasn't stuck there,but has been absolutely co-opted
by this wellness space.

SPEAKER_05 (43:45):
And the other point that really occurred to me the
other day is that I've heard somany times, well uh Western
medicine, they call it, it's notWestern, it's science-based
medicine, is only really good atum surgical conditions and acute
emergencies.
And my response to that is ifall the alternatives are so

(44:05):
good, why are they so hopelessat surgical procedures and
emergencies?
Yes, it's so.
How can you have a system ofmedicine that can't actually
cope with the mostlife-threatening things?

SPEAKER_04 (44:15):
Yeah, yeah.
It's also wrapped up, isn't it,in the appeal to nature bias.
Yeah, the the word itself, youknow, where natural, natural
naturopath, natural path, youknow, the notion that just
onions, as long as you don't eatthem, can cure things.
It's like, you know, things outof the ground.
It's all this very natural, umexcept weirdly, um, which is not

(44:38):
natural, but they all want toseem to take horse horse paste.
Yes.
Right?
The the ivermectin thing reallyconfused me.
Like, what's with it?
It's like they're still talkingabout the fact that ivermectin,
which is it's to it's forhorses, isn't it?
Horse de worm.

SPEAKER_05 (44:53):
It's a human drug, but it's an anti-helmet or worm
medication or severe scabies.
But that's not natural.

SPEAKER_06 (45:00):
It's not it's not natural.

SPEAKER_04 (45:02):
So how come it got a special?
It's a pharma product.

SPEAKER_06 (45:04):
Yeah.
Well, I I think it so I don'tknow.
So you you may you may have anopinion on this, but I think
what happened was you're sodesperate when you get a cancer
diagnosis, right?
You're you're so desperate.
And then there have been theseanecdotes of people trying
different things andself-umoting their healing

(45:31):
journey, and people have justlatched onto it.
And so And then it spread, doyou think, through the
community, the Ivan?
And then COVID.
Yeah, oh yeah, yeah.
I think really heightened the umthe skepticism of um Western

(45:53):
medicine and because that waslike a crisis in real time,
wasn't it?
That was the world dealing witha crisis in real time.
And and then Ivermectin and andit just really came to the fore.
And now it's really popular, itseems.

SPEAKER_01 (46:11):
Really popular.
Yeah.
Still, it is still reallypopular.

SPEAKER_04 (46:13):
Every cooker post, someone is recommending in the
comments that the person wrapstheir feet seriously in onions
and has ivermectin foreverything.

SPEAKER_05 (46:23):
Yeah, for essentially any condition.
For absolutely conditions.
I also see it as part of therebellion against big pharma and
the man, which is ironic becauseit is big a big pharma product.

SPEAKER_01 (46:34):
What was it, Kate?
The the the uh big wellness isfar more lucrative than way.

SPEAKER_06 (46:41):
Well, I think I I I think I said last time that it
was big big wellness has has gotthe the earning capacity of big
pharma and the GDP of Japan.

SPEAKER_05 (46:50):
Wow.

SPEAKER_06 (46:51):
That's how that's how much bigger it is than
without the RD of big pharma.

SPEAKER_05 (46:55):
Without the R D.

SPEAKER_04 (46:57):
And that's the other thing.
The appeal to nature bias thenmasks the the reality that a lot
of these untested vitamins andsupplements that can actually be
quite dangerous, yes?

SPEAKER_06 (47:10):
Can be quite dangerous.
I mean the the the TGA has justlast week put a uh a warning on
vitamin B6.
Yep.
Um and but I think also peoplefail to I mean, people are
always saying that Big Pharmamake so much money because, I
don't know, whatever tabletscost zero cents to make, but

(47:30):
they sell them at large profits.
And of course that's that'spartly true, but the first
tablet cost them hundreds andmillions and millions and
millions of dollars.
I mean, the second tablet mighthave cost them 20 cents.

SPEAKER_04 (47:41):
That is such a good frame-up.
The first tablet, for all theresearch and all the work, cost
them millions.
Millions millions.
Such a fantastic I like thatframe-up.

SPEAKER_05 (47:53):
And by the time they get to be using that, when they
get to the successful one,they've already tested 20 others
that didn't make it to marketbecause they didn't work.

SPEAKER_01 (48:01):
Yep.
All right.
Well, for the for the moment,for this section of the show,
thank you, Sue.
You're right.
Thank you, Sue.

SPEAKER_02 (48:09):
Yay.

SPEAKER_01 (48:14):
Is everybody ready?

SPEAKER_03 (48:17):
Welcome back to the Occidental Hotel for part two of
the live recording of the WhySmart Women Zone.

unknown (48:23):
Woo!

SPEAKER_03 (48:26):
Now it is time to introduce our third guest for
tonight.
It is the president ofAustralian Skeptics, Jessica
Singer.

unknown (48:32):
Woo! Jessica!

SPEAKER_04 (48:37):
Tim Mendem.

SPEAKER_01 (48:38):
Tim Mendem, heckling in the audience.
Good Lord.
You'll get yours, mate.
You just will.
We will.
Hello.
Thank you, Lara.
Thank you, Lara.
Hello, Jessica.

SPEAKER_08 (48:47):
Hello, Jessica.
Richard, and hello Annie.
Hello, it's exciting.
It's exciting.

SPEAKER_04 (48:52):
It's lovely to be here.
Whose hat is that, by the way?
Oh, yeah.
Put it.
Kate.
Put your hat.
Kate took a Santa hat off.
It's illegal.
It's close to Christmas.
Good lord.
Do go on.
Sorry to Kate.
Kate really threw us all by theSanta hat issue, but we're over
that now.

SPEAKER_01 (49:11):
Jessica, the president of Australian Skeptics
for four or five years.
I can't remember.

SPEAKER_04 (49:19):
I'd like to know how you got that position.
Was there greasing of palms oroh just just just said no?

SPEAKER_08 (49:30):
Look, just just absolute corruption.
Yeah, good.
Totally.
That's good.
Absolutely.
And I have said Richard has beenpresident twice.
Have you, Richard?
Yes.
Yeah, yeah.
Good lord.
He he uh he greased a few palms.

SPEAKER_02 (49:43):
Yeah, yeah, clearly.
Clearly.

SPEAKER_01 (49:47):
But it's it's it's uh an interesting job to be the
president.
Uh there's a lot of like anycommittee, you have a lot of
committee things to deal withand to think about.

SPEAKER_04 (49:58):
Are people annoying on the committee?
Because I hate committeesbecause of that.
Tim, oh yeah, did you want tosay that?
Tim's raising his hand.

SPEAKER_08 (50:07):
Tim's volunteering for the chief annoyance officer.
He's the annoyance officer inthe committee.
He annoys this all the time.
That's right.
I think yeah.
Our committee's pretty good.
Pretty good.
Pretty good, really.
Pretty good.
Um, I think uh partly becauseit's um by invitation only.
And before getting invited tojoin, people have to have to

(50:28):
prove themselves.
Um because it's it's a committeecan be really ruined by conflict
and and eccentricity.
So so we don't mind.

SPEAKER_04 (50:41):
I think agendas, I think unspoken agendas are
mainly what ruin collaborativeenterprise, don't you think?

SPEAKER_08 (50:49):
Yes, yes.
And and uh not forgetting uh thelegalities of it, we are an
incorporated association, wehave a constitution.
Um people have to really puttheir agendas and their egos
aside and think about what isbest for the organization.
Uh, because at law, when youjoin a committee, uh there is a

(51:09):
contract between every committeeand the organization, and you
have certain um duties tofulfill.

SPEAKER_01 (51:16):
And there are legal requirements you have to have as
a uh a body doing things,especially when you have
balances and bank accounts andthis and that.
So there's a lot more to it.

SPEAKER_04 (51:25):
So I wonder if this sort of collegial atmosphere
that you seem to have, that youknow, because honestly, I I w
I've spent a lot of time workingin the corporate sector and
trying to help people have morefunctional teams, and it's very,
very difficult.
Oh yeah, right, right, right.

(51:46):
I know, because people arepeople.
But I wonder if perhaps yourpurpose, the sense that you're
very purposeful, has perhapsameliorated some of that
conflict.
I don't know, it's interesting.

SPEAKER_08 (51:58):
I think so, because it's not it's not a job, it's
not a an employment situation ina company.
Um, people are there becausethey um they're they believe in
what we do.
So that people areself-selecting.
And what do you do?

SPEAKER_04 (52:15):
What do the what do the Australian skeptics do?

SPEAKER_01 (52:18):
Barbecues.
Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (52:20):
Yeah.
I've been to one recently.
You have?
Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_08 (52:23):
It was like drinking, yeah.
Getting thrown out of mind bodywallet.
Thank you, Ian.
You're here.
Yes.
Yes.
Escorted, escorted out of thevenue by security.

SPEAKER_04 (52:39):
Simply for simply for asking questions.
Questions.
Simply for doing.
I'm not allowed to questionthings at mind body wallet.

SPEAKER_08 (52:47):
No.

SPEAKER_01 (52:47):
Kate, next year you and I can aim to be thrown out,
huh?

SPEAKER_04 (52:50):
All right.
Game one.
What about me?
Well, come on, I'm getting leftout of the throwing out
experience.
You were in a puddle.
Because you're in the I can't doit again.

SPEAKER_08 (52:59):
Yeah.
I can't do it again.
I'm sorry.
But back to what the Australiando.
Australian skeptics.
So we, as I think Richard saidearlier, we uh investigate uh
pseudoscientific and paranormalclaims from an evidence-based
scientific perspective.

SPEAKER_04 (53:17):
Unpack that.
What does that mean for peoplethat have maybe never had any
experience with the scepticalorganization?

SPEAKER_08 (53:23):
Oh, I I like I like Tim Mendham's example.
If somebody says, I can fly, wesay, show me.
Show me.
Prove it.

SPEAKER_01 (53:30):
Prove it.

SPEAKER_04 (53:31):
So I'm a psychic, I know what's going to happen in
your future, right?
For instance.

SPEAKER_08 (53:36):
Well, that's pretty testable.
Because I have a hopefully havea future.

SPEAKER_07 (53:40):
So if you want to write down your predictions, we
can see whether they comewhether they come true.
Or you have better than uhbetter than probability.

SPEAKER_01 (53:49):
But we're also there as a general committee to chat
to the general public and themedia.
The media come to us every nowand then for comment.
About what?
Well, anything from the latestpsychic to the latest UFO fad
flap, sometimes aboutalternative medicine.
And it's good to know that thereis a at least people of our way
of thinking, scientific,rational people who are there

(54:11):
ready to offer an opinion.
And not just, oh, I think thisis the case, an opinion based on
lots of research and soundscience.

SPEAKER_08 (54:18):
Although you do, I mean, w we do have to be fairly
tactical about it.
I remember um what, 10, 15 yearsago, um when the uh AVN was at
its height.

SPEAKER_04 (54:32):
So just for just to remind everyone that's
listening, the AVN is theAustralian vaccination network.

SPEAKER_08 (54:39):
Misnamed, they were actually the anti-vaxxers.
Yes.
But um it was a very considereddecision because also in the
media at that time, uh there wasthis focus on oh, the media, we
need to get balance, balance,balance in all our stories.
So if they had an anti va ifthey had an anti-vaxxer on, they
would invite us on to providebalance.

(55:03):
And at at the time we made thedecision, no, we are not going
to go on and give these peoplecredit and credibility by um
debating them because they'd getfive minutes, we'd get 30
seconds.

SPEAKER_04 (55:18):
F false equivalent, false equivalence is just the
most damaging principle, is itnot?

SPEAKER_08 (55:25):
Yeah, and slowly but surely the the message got
through to the media not to givethese people airtime.
And a c a couple of journalistswere Sky News, right?
Oh, yeah.
So I mean a couple of journalswere really helpful.
I think Steve Canaan.
Yes, very he's awesome, SteveCanaan.

SPEAKER_04 (55:44):
Yeah, he's awesome.

SPEAKER_08 (55:45):
Yeah.
So so yes, we um we do providemedia commentary, um, but uh in
a very considered way.

SPEAKER_04 (55:54):
Yeah.
And of course, the the the thingabout a considered response in
terms of that false equivalence,it's often not as interesting as
some sort of febrile narrative,right?
That just with full of promiseand magic and I don't know,
patches.
Absolutely.

SPEAKER_08 (56:12):
I mean it's it's it's it's dead boring being
being scientific andcommonsensical.
And is that part of the problem,Jessica?
Possibly.
I mean, I think it's fun, butthen hey, I'm you're a lawyer.
I'm a lawyer.
That's right.
That's that's why my my partner,who many of you good old

(56:35):
hatters, um you'll remember.
Lovely partner um lovely, lovelychat.
My partner and I, we gotinvolved in skepticism uh partly
because it had nothing to dowith law.
Is that right?
Is that partially what motivatedyou?
It was it was somethingdifferent for both of us.
And um uh Martin Heard um, thiswas back in the early 90s and

(56:56):
because he was very present andvery a very big part of the
committee.
Oh, Teddy, he was he was um Hewas also president.
He he he actually occupied everysingle office on the committee
at one stage.
He started out as secretary,then he was president, and then
he moved over to treasurers.
So he was um yeah, he was a amainstay of the organization for

(57:19):
for many years and uh a great uhsounding board.
Sounding board.
Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 (57:25):
And what do you think as you sort of look into
the future, what what do youthink are the really important
things that the sceptics have tostart to get a handle on,
grapple with, encounter?
Oh, look, I think and Is that ahorrible question?
Should I should I've given thatto it?

SPEAKER_08 (57:42):
Yeah.
It's it's a hard questionbecause I think we are in a
stage where we have to really,really look at that.
Um we've had a big, big changesthis year with with Tim, our
editor and executive officerretiring.
Stop talking about Tim.
Tim was all about Tim.
Tim Tim Times.

SPEAKER_04 (58:03):
He can barely get out the door.
My goodness.
Good Lord.
Go on.

SPEAKER_08 (58:08):
And the the very difficult and and quite sad
decision to stop publishing theuh hard copy of the magazine.
I love the magazine, Tim.
Such a great, great resource,great, great product, such a um
great example of what we're allabout.
And um show them.
It uh it's a it's a podcast,Sue.

SPEAKER_01 (58:34):
No, I I thought that was a fire that that was a fire
alarm.
Bless you, Sue.
Somebody's dinner was ready forthat.

SPEAKER_04 (58:41):
Sue's got a whole lot of magazines on her lap and
she's desperate to show them onthe podcast.

SPEAKER_08 (58:46):
Yes, but even even though you can't subscribe to
the hard copies anymore, theyare all online.
All online listeners.
That's right.
And and we have a uh we have astorage room full of the full of
them.
So the future is what?
The future is what?
The future is um firstly puttingout more online content because

(59:09):
that's where it is.
Yep.
And um the future is keep going.
Yeah, agree.
Yeah, agree.
There what we do is definitelynecessary, critical, critical,
important, relevant.
Um we are we have the challengesof the fact that information

(59:33):
these days, thanks to theinternet, is so dispersed into
different groups, it's reallyhard.
I mean, again, when when Martinand I originally joined The
Skeptics, it was all mainstreammedia.
There was no internet.
It was whereas things are sodispersed and fractured into
different groups these days.

(59:54):
It it I and I think you know,from what Sue said, particularly
in Australia, Australians arepretty pragmatic, and I think
they'd consider themselvespretty skeptical naturally, and
don't naturally gravitate to Doyou think there's a difference
between the AustralianAustralian cultural psych psyche

(01:00:15):
and the Americans?

SPEAKER_04 (01:00:16):
Oh, definitely.
Definitely.
Thank God for that, right.

SPEAKER_08 (01:00:22):
Right.
Well, I mean I was I've beenI've been thinking about this
for the last couple of weeks andbeen actually quite heartened
how on again, mainstream radio,we'll put Sky News aside, um,
but mainstream radio, how manyscience-based and sceptical

(01:00:43):
topics are dealt with?
I mean, to uh Nicole Rogerson umtalking about autism and the
importance of evidence-basedautism.
Are you saying it's not causedby Tylenol?

SPEAKER_04 (01:00:58):
Jessica, please.
Uh you could be right.
I it's right, I'm definitelyright.
If I had uh Michael Marshall onMarsh, yes.
Yes, who's who's from theMerseyside schedule.
Merseyside, yeah.
And he just to go back to yourpoint about um the spreading
information in the informationuh in the internet age, and he

(01:01:18):
was saying if you went into thepub 25 years ago and said the
moon landing didn't happen,vaccines cause autism or
whatever, right?
Someone would go, you know, giveit a rest, John.
Right?
Donald Trump will be president.
That's right.

SPEAKER_08 (01:01:32):
That's right.
You know, nobody would believe.

SPEAKER_04 (01:01:34):
And it would get counted and you'd look like an
idiot, you'd stumble out and youknow, fall in the snow and die.
I don't know if it's gonnahappen to you.
That's probably a little bitdark, but anyway.
Um, but now, of course, you saythat.
Sorry, I keep hitting my handson the table and I do apologize.
Um now what happens is you feelFind your your little group
online that goes yet so trueabout the no moon landing thing.

(01:02:01):
Right.
So it's different now.
So I think our job is harder.

SPEAKER_08 (01:02:05):
Our job is harder.
And also it's it's so hard togauge um how large these little
factions are and whether theymatter.
I mean, obviously what we'veseen in the States is is these
relatively small, you know,ideologies take hold of the

(01:02:27):
majority of the country.
It's really scary.
I wouldn't have thought.

SPEAKER_04 (01:02:31):
RFK.
Who knew?
Who knew?
He knew.
He knew.
Sadly.

SPEAKER_01 (01:02:37):
Well, thank you, Jessica, for the moment.
Oh thank you.
Thank you.
Oh, thank you.
Indeed.
But there's something else weshould mention, I think, just
like that.
What is it, Richard?

SPEAKER_08 (01:02:48):
Something we should mention.
Something we should mention.
It's very exciting.
Yes.
Do do you think you can mentionthat?
Oh, I would mention that.
I mentioned the thing, right?
It's a thing.
It's a thing.

SPEAKER_01 (01:02:58):
Wow.

SPEAKER_08 (01:02:59):
Well, I I mentioned earlier our uh former editor and
executive officer Tim.
Oh, him again.
He's frowning at me.
He retired this year.
And uh at our annual convention,which was in Melbourne this year
in October, we uh awarded Timnot only life membership for his

(01:03:21):
um wonderful, wonderful work,his fantastic professional job,
editing the skeptic, dealingwith the skeptics committee,
which must have driven himinsane.
It did.
It did.
Um yeah, he's he's going goingoff for a rescue now.
And uh and we also uh honouredhis lovely wife, Hilda.

(01:03:41):
Hilda, everybody.
Hilda.
Hey Hilda, who for so many yearsdid the design and layout of our
magazine for free uh and uh madeit into something of which we
could be truly, truly proud.
A very good, very good design.
Fantastic.
Yeah, excellent.
Fantastic.

(01:04:02):
So not only did we give Tim lifemembership, or is it a life
sentence?
Um not forgetting he he ran awayfrom home at the age of four to
join the skeptics.
That's right, he did.
Very young.
Then he had a short hiatus andcame back, and he he's been in
his current position for 18years, is it?
Almost.
Almost 18 years.

(01:04:23):
But we also, in recognition ofTim's contribution to the
skeptical movement, gave him alifetime achievement.

SPEAKER_03 (01:04:34):
The rest of the life.

SPEAKER_08 (01:04:37):
So, because I didn't take this down to Melbourne, but
we've actually now organizedthis trophy for him.
Tim.

SPEAKER_04 (01:04:47):
Oh, it's one.
Okay, so because it's a podcastand we can't see this.
Please describe it.
Please describe it.

SPEAKER_01 (01:04:57):
It's an orgon pyramid.
To be inserted.
The being oh, I feel the energy.

SPEAKER_08 (01:05:08):
I feel better.
See, I can see on the wonderfulbase there's a little picture on
the other side, Tim.

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:14):
It's you.
Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 (01:05:15):
And I thought I used to.
Yeah, and I think I think did weput the picture there so that we
didn't have to worry aboutmisspelling your name?

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:22):
So I knew who it was.
So, ladies and gentlemen, uh awarm applaud for Tim Mendham,
who did a sterling job.

SPEAKER_04 (01:05:33):
Thank you, Tim.
Awesome, Tim.
It's enough about you now, Tim.
Off you go.
Bye-bye then.
It's been really great.

SPEAKER_01 (01:05:41):
Uh when when Barry Williams retired, uh and then
shortly thereafter, it wasn'ttoo long, uh some months after
uh Tim came along, and he wasjust the right person at the
right time.
Not only was he a a good editor,and I've written a lot for the
magazine, but I couldn't havedone it without Tim editing what
the rubbish I wrote and turningit into something, but he also

(01:06:04):
is that rare fellow in theskeptical movement or the rare
person who has the skepticalknowledge of all sorts of
topics.
And so when the press ring upand say anything from Bigfoot to
UFOs to how does this psychic doit, Tim could answer them on the
spot.
And that is a rare thing indeed.
So well done.

SPEAKER_05 (01:06:26):
I might get up.

SPEAKER_01 (01:06:27):
You make it up.
We knew you did.

SPEAKER_03 (01:06:32):
Alright.
Yes, yes.
So you have been listening tothe Why Smart Women's Own
podcast.
Thank you to our guests and liveaudience here at Sydney Skeptics
in the pub.
You can find out more about thisand future events at meetup.com
forward slash ost skeptics.
I'm Lara Benham, and for now itis good night from the
Occidental Hotel.

unknown (01:06:53):
Yay! Beautiful.

SPEAKER_04 (01:07:04):
So there you go.
That was us.
It was really awesome.
We had a few very nice glassesof wine afterwards, and I had a
chicken burger.
It was terrific.
Um, I hope you enjoyed it.
We certainly enjoyed it.
And wherever you are, stay safe,stay well, keep your critical
thinking hats on.
See you later.
Bye.