New website!

Transcripts, sources, etc can now all be found on badmedicinepod.com!

Bad Medicine 003: Mary Rafferty Part 2 transcript

So after Mary Rafferty’s death, Dr. Bartholow sent the results of his experiment off to be published and it quickly created a bit of an uproar in the scientific community. Farrier had a few criticisms of Bartholow and Farrier was the one who had been doing the studies on animal models such as monkeys and dogs. He said that Bartholow pushed the needles into the brain substance while he applied the electrodes to the cortical surface. Because Bartholow’s needles were so far into the brain, the electric current could diffuse farther and activate parts of the brain that he was not trying to study. Bartholow also pushed the needles deep enough to activate the cerebral centers of the tactile nerves, which would explain why Rafferty was in so much pain.

However, Farrier concluded that Bartholow’s study was a complete parallel to his own findings, and generally spoke of it favorably.

Bad Medicine 002: Mary Rafferty part 1 transcript

Imagine, one day, you look in the mirror and notice a scab on your head. It’s small and just looks like you scratched it accidentally. After a few weeks, you notice that the scab is larger, and it hurts to touch. You put on a hat and hope it will heal on its own. Maybe you can’t afford a doctor right now. After a few months, the scab has become a sore, bleeding ulcer. It hurts a lot and you don’t want it to grow any bigger. Finally, you take yourself to the hospital. A doctor informs you that you have only a year to live, at best, because that ulcer is cancerous. You’re shocked and distraught. The doctor tells you that since you’re on your way out, anyway, you could further science by taking part in an experiment. It would make your horrible disease useful and could even cure others of this disease in the future. That sounds wonderful, of course, so you give your consent. The doctor then places needles in your brain without anaesthetic, shocks you painfully until you seize and go into a coma, does this about five more times, waits for you to die, and then publishes a paper with unclear conclusions.

This is essentially what happened to Mary Rafferty under the care of Dr. Roberts Bartholow.

Bad Medicine 002: Mary Rafferty Part 1 sources

Harris, LJ and Almerigi, JB. (2009.) “Probing the human brain with stimulating electrodes: the story of Roberts Barthoow’s 1874 experiment on Mary Rafferty. Brain Cogn, 70(1). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19286295

Zago, S. Ferruci, R. Fregni, F. Priori, A. (2008.) “Bartholow, Sciamanna, Alberti: Pioneers in the Electrical Stimulation of the Exposed Human Cerebral Cortex.” The Neuroscientist, 14(521).

Bad Medicine 001: Bad for Baby sources

“Diagnosis of Congenital Syphilis: Pathognomonic criteria” by MD William C. Black. Journal of Pediatrics, 1939 vol. 14 issue 6 pages 761-779.

 “The etiology of acute infectious gingivostomatitis (Vincent’s stomatitis).” by MD William C. Black. Journal of Pediatrics, 1942 vol 20 issue 2.

"1930s-1940s: William C Black, MD, conducted herpes experiments on children."   AHRP.org. http://ahrp.org/1930s-1940s-william-c-black-md-herpes-experiments-on-children/

Bad Medicine 002: Mary Rafferty Part 1

Bad Medicine 001: Bad for Baby Transcript

When I was in undergrad, I had a medical ethics professor that liked to give seemingly simple examples. It’s wrong to kick a kid, he would say, and the class would nod in agreement.


Then he would expand upon the situation. It’s wrong to kick a kid to find out what kicking a kid does, he would say, and most of the class would still be nodding. It’s easy to infer that kicking a kid will probably just result in a crying kid.


Eventually, the situation would become so complicated that what used to be unanimous agreement would become this shattered, spiraling conversation on just what would make it okay to attack a child. Would it be okay to kick a kid if you got $1000? Probably not. Would it be okay to kick a kid if there was a 5% chance of preventing other kids from being kicked in the future? That seems like low odds. But is it okay at 25%? 50%?