Without further ado, my cover article for the November/December issue of the Pacific Standard. Short excerpt and link below.

Child sexual abuse is, of course, a serious and widespread issue in America. Researchers agree that it occurs far more often than official statistics indicate, because children so often decline to report their abuse out of embarrassment, a desire to protect members of their family, or in an attempt to avoid the memory altogether. But the idea that people can immediately banish abuse from their own consciousness, lock those memories away for years, and then recover them through therapy is one with far shakier empirical grounding, and a deeply problematic history. The therapeutic vogue for memory recovery in the early 1990s fueled a nationwide moral panic over ritual sex abuse, satanic cults, and other supposedly repressed traumas. Today, for most of us, the fad seems like a strange, self-contained, and very much closed chapter in recent cultural history.

But for Tom Mitchell, who denies his daughter’s accusations, the controversy is very much alive. He believes his family has suffered from the fact that the mental health establishment has never really purged itself of a thoroughly discredited idea—and arguably lacks the basic mechanisms necessary to self-correct.

Check out the full story here.

So. I’m horrible at updates.

Which is a damn shame because there have been some huge ones!

• I’m now contributing to the Daily Dot as one of their op-ed writers. It’s a very awesome website focusing on the latest news in tech, culture, and tech culture! Some of the topics I’ve already tackled have included Ebola, Stevie Wonder Truthers, plagiarism, and whether pink slime is all it’s grossed up to be. Their staff/editors are very supportive and I greatly appreciate having the opportunity to further my writing voice.

• Even more hugely, my months-long project is finally out in the public! It’s a feature length article for the Pacific Standard, a bimonthly print and online publication focused on important societal issues through the lens of science and empiricism. In its short two-year existence, they’ve featured articles from renowned authors, journalists, and scientists and I’m incredibly honored to join their ranks. I’m at a loss of words to describe the sheer joy it has been to work with the magazine and publish this very important piece. Because of that awe-inspired silence, I’ll let them preview the article, available now in their print and digital issues and free online next Monday:

The idea that hidden memories can be “recovered” in therapy took the nation by storm 20 years ago, when a rash of false memories dominated the airwaves, tore families apart, and put people on the stands for crimes they didn’t commit. Thoroughly and publicly discredited since then, the therapeutic practice of memory recovery never really went away, however.

Pacific Standard tells the story of a dangerous idea’s persistence by recounting the harrowing experience of one family: a father accused of sexual abuse by his daughter in 2011; his ordeal in the courts; and his eventual discovery of other young women who alleged that they had been prompted to “remember” scenes of ritual abuse while at the same prominent St. Louis facility where his daughter had been receiving treatment.

As it may be apparent by now, I’m not the greatest at maintaining a regular blog, and that’s frankly because it can be hard to spend the time and effort to work (for free) on a piece that I know will only reach a small audience. That isn’t to say that I don’t appreciate any potential readers on here nor the needed writing practice because I sincerely do.

It’s just that writing, or at least my writing, has always been a very time-extensive hobby I’ve squeezed in between a full-time job, volunteering, and a social life. And very thankfully, that writing has now started to reach some major outlets and with that, left me even less time to keep a personal blog. It’s been a surreal experience to realize slowly that I’m more than within my rights to call myself a freelance journalist/writer now, and that I should seek to work towards that career. That doesn’t mean that I want to stop blogging on here wholesale, it just means that the only reason I haven’t been writing on here lately is because I’ve been writing elsewhere for fantastic places and publications. And much as I love my pug banner, I really hope that continues.

In the meantime, I’ll definitely still maintain a presence and write occasional posts on here. Should I get motivated enough, I might even start a weekly link roundup of the best articles I’ve gotten to read.

Hope to seeya around.

Earlier this morning, the World Health Organization offered this tidbit of advice on their Twitter feed.

For the uninitiated, homeopathy is a philosophy of alternative medicine that states all illness can be treated by identifying the symptoms of a sufferer and offering them a diluted solution of a substance known to cause those exact same symptoms in larger doses. According to homeopathic theory, this works because the specific process of dilution a homeopath uses creates a solution in which the memory of the substance is retained, but not its physical presence. According to all known laws of physics, this doesn’t work because water is not a taped over videocassette. While there are many, many objections you could make about the viability of homeopathy, my personal favorite is the fact that a homeopathic remedy – at least if done “correctly” – contains exactly zero molecules of the original substance used to prepare it. It is literally just water.

The WHO’s warning comes amidst the world’s worst recorded outbreak of the novel hemorrhagic fever, having killed over 660 people across several countries in Africa. Despite its reputation as a potential world-ender, Ebola is really most devastating in the economic costs incurred by the already poor countries it visits. That’s not to say that the disease, with its high fatality rate of 50% to 90% and its ghasly presentation of intense vomiting, diarrhea and internal bleeding, isn’t absolutely frightening, but it’s pretty much the Jaws of the disease world, least judging by the bevy of unwarranted fears and myths that rear their ugly head when an Ebola outbreak receives public attention.

That’s why today’s message comes off as particularly frustrating to see. It’s obviously enough of a concern that the WHO felt the need to address the issue. And sure enough, throw a shallow stone into the internet and you’ll find homeopaths offering remedies for the deadly viral disease. For added insult, this particular homeopath bases their recommendation on distillations created for use against the 1918 flu. You don’t have to work for the CDC to figure out homeopathy didn’t do much back then either against the globe-spanning pandemic that wiped out 3-5% of the world’s population.

There are also homeopathic organizations scattered across Africa, whose websites are filled with photographs of beaming homeopaths offering modern snake oil cures and calling it medicine. One in particular presents its mission as “providing free holistic treatment for people living with HIV/ AIDS in Tanzania”. If you hear a sharp thud against the computer/tablet screen after that sentence, that’s just me pounding my fists in incredulous rage at the image of already disadvantaged people living with an incurable disease being treated with the equivalent of a cootie shot. While it’s bad enough that a homeopathic treatment is worthless in every sense of the word, it also delays if not outright dissuades legitimate medical aid from being provided to those who need it. This is especially horrific in developing countries with an already fragile healthcare infrastructure. In 2009, the WHO released a public statement condemning such practices in Africa, though apparently to little avail.

Clenched teeth aside, the WHO’s note of caution today emphasizes one of the most important reasons we need to combat scientific misinformation: Because the cost of a lie inevitably ends being paid by the people who can least afford it.

Anne: I’m a scientist. I like studying the world! And stuff.

That there might just be the most cogent definition of ‘scientist’ ever made, and it came from the mouth of a 11-year-old girl who builds giant robots androids in her spare time.

Read More

Someday, when the shores of Florida have retreated onto itself, New York is more levee than city and the heart of Africa is flooded, our grandchildren will come knocking at the drenched door and ask why.

Why, when faced with the knowledge of an impending yet preventable catastrophe, did we do nothing but squabble about its merits? Why did we stare into the face of oblivion only to stomp our feet and drown out its repeated warnings with cries of cost-effectiveness and socialist takeovers? Why did we, as journalist Nick Cohen put forlornly earlier this year, fail to shake humanity from its complacency? And I don’t know what I’ll be able to say to them.

Maybe I’ll point them to the financial records of energy corporations who spent millions every year to cultivate public doubt of the long established scientific consensus. Or the inane scribblings of designated climate skeptics who repeated the same debunked arguments until their ears filled up with sea water, and of the supposedly impartial publications that continuously allowed them writing space. I’ll tell them of an ideological movement fundamentally opposed to the idea of responsible, restrained capitalism and of those who sheepishly stood aside for them as they crafted policy, doled out billions in oil and gas subsidies and prevented regulatory action. These were all pieces of the puzzle, I’ll say. And though there existed plenty who were willing to fight for the future, they underestimated the tenacity of our collective passivity.

As my eyes welt up in a quiet anger at that last realization, I’ll plead with them to forgive us for what we did and didn’t do. And I’ll understand when they instead turn around and slam the door in my face. Someday.

Leonard Bernstein and Gene Thorp/The Washington Post

Source: Leonard Bernstein and Gene Thorp/The Washington Post

Related reading:
Among global warming deniers, U.S. is number one: Poll (July 22nd)

Whistleblowing is not for the meek at heart.

There’s a gauntlet of mistrust and doubt that awaits the unlucky soul willing to illuminate the darker corners of an institution, politely and scholarly worded as they might be.

Read More

Our lifestyle choices can be deceiving in their independence.

A bagel here, a twenty minute jog there, there’s an existential comfort in believing the decisions we make to exist in a vacuum, free from unseen influence. Unfortunately, science is rarely considerate enough to offer us that same comfort. From open access journal and beloved light of my life PloS-One:

Physical inactivity, ambient air pollution and obesity are modifiable risk factors for non-communicable diseases, with the first accounting for 10% of premature deaths worldwide. Although community level interventions may target each simultaneously, research on the relationship between these risk factors is lacking.

Read More

Over the span of May to October 2012, anthropologist Lauren Renée Moore interviewed 37 residents of the university town Lawrence, Kansas.

Finding volunteers through various supermarkets, community events and restaurants, Moore was interested in documenting one of the fastest growing populations in the United States: the gluten-free.

Read More

This is a reprinted post from last year. As is, it’s honestly one of my favorite ones and the timing is perfect considering the subject. Though my thoughts have evolved slightly on the matter, it overall nails my present convictions and beliefs about nutrition and obesity. It’s especially relevant considering an upcoming writing/personal project I’ll be taking on next month…though that will have to wait until tomorrow to reveal.

The last week of February is a very important time to me. An anniversary of sorts, more significant than my birthday in March to be perfectly honest with you. The day, I don’t remember now, that I first started running.

Read More


In an article late yesterday, prominent Slate writer Amanda Marcotte asks us whether prosecuting a crime is worth forcing an alleged rape victim to testify against her alleged rapist by placing her in jail.


There ya go, not a hard question at all. No, we should probably draw the line at holding captive a 43-year-old woman believed to have been held captive by her alleged rapists and whose crime we’re supposedly seeking justice for.

Read More