‘Murdered’ British backpacker Grace Millane, 22, made a chilling final Instagram post – featuring a skull painting and a quote about death.
Grace, an advertising graduate and talented artist, is believed to have been killed between December 1 and 2, court documents show. A few weeks before her death, Grace, had uploaded her last post to her Instagram art page – a watercolour of a human skull.
Grace had captioned the image “Two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead” – a quote from the theme song of the hit TV show, Pretty Little Liars, which follows the lives of four girls after their friend vanishes.
Is this a chilling case of prophecy, or ‘just a coincidence’?
Especially notable in Michael’s account is the huge gap that exists between the impact of a coincidence on the experiencer and an outsider perspective on the very same event.
This fact is revealed in his own experiences of sharing coincidences and witnessing other people’s reactions. This observation has been confirmed in laboratory research suggesting that one person’s amazing coincidence can bring on a yawn.
Dr Michael Thalbourne (MT) was born in Adelaide, South Australia, on March 24th 1955 and passed away on the 4th of May 2010. He was educated at the University of Adelaide and the University of Edinburgh. From 1980 until 1987 Thalbourne was employed at the McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research at Washington University in St Louis Missouri, USA. In 1992 he returned to his hometown of Adelaide where he served as the President of the Australian Institute for Parapsychological Research and was the editor of the Australian Journal of Parapsychology.
Survey of Beliefs about Coincidences
MT used a 10-item survey of attitudes towards, and experience of, coincidence with 24 people. To the statement “I have experienced truly astounding coincidences”, 25% reported “often”, 63% “now and again”, and 13% reported “rarely”; nobody reported “never”.
Another statement was: “I experience many small coincidences which would probably not impress other people but which make life interesting for me”. 29% responded “strongly agree”, 58% said “agree”, while 8% were uncertain and 4% said “disagree”.
A third statement was “It takes a certain vigilance of mind to see subtle coincidences.” Sixty-seven percent agreed or strongly agreed, 17% were uncertain, and the same percentage said “disagree”. Thus, the majority agreed with the statement.
The causation of coincidences was included in the survey. MT asked: “Coincidences may be expected to occur from time to time just by chance or pure luck, and they never signify anything important or meaningful.” MT reports that no one said “strongly agree”, 33% said “agree”, 21% were uncertain, while 29% disagreed and 17% strongly disagreed.
Another statement was “People who report many coincidences must be reading meaning into events which are just random.” Eight percent strongly agreed, 25% agreed, 38% were uncertain, 21% disagreed, and 8% strongly disagreed.
What is quite interesting is the strong link between having a positive attitudes towards coincidences and being much more likely to believe in experiences of the paranormal (r = .72, p < .001).
Egocentricity – the ‘yawn’ factor
One problem in considering coincidences is the “egocentricity” bias (Falk, 1989). People consider their own coincidences to be surprising and worthy of note, but other people hearing those same coincidences tend to be dismissive of them, thinking they occurred purely by chance.
MT confesses that, following the Falk study, he became more reluctant to share his own personal coincidences with other people. As a person who recently shared a coincidence in print myself, I can well understand MT’s reaction. But the large number of coincidences that he experienced seemed too great to be a chance effect, so he thought he’d carry on sharing them. I have also felt this way at times, and there is no fool-proof way of eliminating the paranormal hypothesis, as far as I am aware.
MT gives three detailed examples of what he took to be potentially ‘paranormal’ coincidences. I quote these here as part of a developing portfolio of published cases.
MT Case 1
Thursday April 21st, 2005…
MT states: “I was deeply immersed in Liddell and Scott’s (1889) An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon. In particular I was studying the preposition ΠΡΟ (i.e., PRO) to see whether it could mean “on behalf of”. I scoured the two-thirds of a column devoted to this preposition, but could not find the meaning I wanted. I had to give up at that point, because at 6:30 I was to go out to a fast food restaurant with a friend, for dinner.
Less than half an hour later, when we were at the restaurant, there passed by our table a young lad in soccer gear: on his shirt were the words, in Greek, ΑΣΠΙΣ ΠΡΟΝΟΙΑ (ASPIS PRONOIA). I for my part was astonished that he should be wearing, in Greek, even though as part of a longer word, the preposition ΠΡΟ. I knew that ΠΡΟΝΟΙΑ was a compound word made up of that preposition ΠΡΟ plus ΝΟΙΑ (from NOEEIN, to perceive), meaning something like “forethought”. (However, I was unfamiliar with the word ΑΣΠΙΣ, and I asked the boy what it meant, but he didn’t know. When I got home, I looked it up and discovered that it meant “a body of soldiers”. So the soccer shirt meant something like “a body of soldiers with forethought.”)
It seemed to me that the coincidence of having two quite unrelated instances of the Greek word ΠΡΟ within half an hour of each other was highly unlikely to occur by chance.
I’d never seen the boy before, and have never seen him since, nor have I seen this Greek phrase (or any other Greek words) on another soccer shirt. However, those around me with whom I shared the coincidence dismissed it as chance (as perhaps the reader will too!) But the egocentric bias is strong for the experient of a coincidence as well as for the people to whom it is told. Thus, I continue to regard the coincidence (and many that I’ve experienced since) as being more than chance.”
MT Case 2
“Saturday, December 11th, 2004, my family and I were gathered at the flat of my youngest brother to celebrate his 42nd birthday. Two coincidences occurred to me that day. First of all, my brother possesses a CD of the composer Monteverdi which he himself never plays but which he good-heartedly loans to me now and again. I spoke aloud the name of the composer, Monteverdi. I was misheard, and was asked “Verdi”? I said, “No. Claudio Monteverdi.” But the question got me thinking, “What is Verdi’s first name? Is it Giuseppe?”
I resolved to check my Webster’s Biographical Dictionary when I got home. Yes, p. 1515reveals that his name was indeed Giuseppe. The coincidence occurred a little later when I was watching the evening news, and a man was interviewed whose first name was given at the bottom of the screen as Giueseppe. (I in fact wondered if the station had spelt the name Giuseppe incorrectly.)”
MT Case 3
“The …coincidence involved my father telling a joke about George W. Bush wanting to get into Heaven to talk with Moses. Bush tried several times, but on each occasion Moses told St. Peter to send him away. Finally, Moses said “The last time I talked with abush I ended up wandering in the wilderness for 40 years!” That evening, just after 8:30, I was watching a commercial station on which there was a movie called For Richer or Poorer with Tim Allen in it as an entrepreneur engaged in setting up theme parks. The character revealed his latest theme park inspiration, which he called “Holy Land”, and pointed out a bush “which bursts into flame every hour”. I know for a fact that my father was unacquainted with the movie and so he had no idea that the theme of the burning bush was to arise later that evening. It is interesting to me that when I told my father about what I’d seen and heard on TV that very night, sceptic that he was, his reaction was one of dogged silence, and certainly not the cry “How amazing!”, as he battled his cognitive dissonance. If he said nothing about the coincidence it would go away.”
MT dismisses skeptical explanations based on chance “as a bottomless pit, able to swallow up each and every coincidence that does not already have a normal explanation.”
On the other hand, MT wisely states that “we must be ever cautious about the coincidences that we do evaluate as paranormal.”
The fact is, however, there is no fool-proof method to say one way or the other. It comes down to one’s own subjective evaluation.
What do you think? Is pure chance the only credible explanation, or are there hidden causes, or is something paranormal going on?
23rd August 2018
At 30,000 feet on the midday flight from Marseille to Heathrow, I am thinking how to spend the afternoon. Unable to go straight home because an estate agent has arranged a viewing with a potential tenant, how would I fill this time? I decide to go for lunch at one of my local haunts on the Thames bank, the City Barge.
Set aside for a moment the fact that the estate agent who had arranged the viewing was Chesterton’s, a family firm with connections to the writer GK Chesterton (1874 – 1936), ‘the prince of paradox’. A few seconds after I made the decision to go for a pub lunch ‘on the Chiswick bank of the river’, I open my kindle and make a fairly random decision to continue reading ‘The Man Who Was Thursday, a Nightmare‘ by Gilbert K Chesterton (GKC).
I flip over the page to see in stark black and white a description of that very place which, moments previously, I had decided to visit, viz:
“”I think,” said Gregory, with placid irrelevancy, “that we will call a cab.” He gave two long whistles, and a hansom came rattling down the road. The two got into it in silence. Gregory gave through the trap the address of an obscure public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river. The cab whisked itself away again, and in it these two fantastics quitted their fantastic town.”
Coincidence is both puzzling and remarkable, a contiguity of events that appear to have no causal connecting principle between one another. A coincidence that seems to go way beyond the laws of chance can elicit a strong sense of the paranormal. I analyse here the ‘Chiswick Coincidence’ for the light it may shed on anomalistic experience. The correspondence between the free and voluntary thought of going to the pub on the Chiswick side of the river and Gregory’s choice to do the identical thing is particularly striking. This coincidence, like others that I, or close family members, have experienced is multi-layered. I discuss here each of these 7 layers.
The ‘Chiswick Coincidence’ consists of two contiguous elements:
Element 1: My decision to go to the City Barge for lunch (because my flat was being viewed by Chestertons).
Then seconds later:
Element 2: I read the line ‘an obscure public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’ in the book by GKC.
Thus, the first layer of coincidence is the fact that the estate agent and the author GKC are members of the same family.
The second layer is the fact that the decision to go to the Chiswick riverside pub was followed only a few seconds later by reading a piece of text referring to a ‘public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’. My immediate reaction being “Wow!”, “Whoa!” “WTX!” in no particular order.
Historical records indicate that The City Barge has existed since 1484 when it was known as ‘The Navigator’s Arms’. Its first appearance in the licensing lists was in 1787 when it was the ‘City Navigation Barge’. As the ‘City Barge’ it was refurbished in 2014. Historical sources point to at least 5 or 6 pubs on the Chiswick side of the river at the time of GKC’s story. The pub mentioned by GKC could have been any or none of these, perhaps only a figment of GKC’s fluid imagination. Two clues make the City Barge a good candidate however. Photographs of the City Barge from 1910, two years after the publication of TMWWTAN, show Thames barges actually tied up directly outside the City Barge. Also, when the two characters in GKC’s story, Gregory and Syme, leave the pub, they go out by the door and “close to the opening lay a dark dwarfish steam-launch”. This description fits the immediate riverside proximity of The City Barge perfectly.
A kindle is a portable library. Mine is 1.33 GB of books, both fiction and non-fiction – the complete works of Shakespeare, Chaucer, Dickens, Joyce, Austen, Pepys, Swift, Zola and much more. On the date in question, there were 498 works containing 146,817 pages . With 350 words per page, there were around 50 million words on my kindle. The odds of seeing the words “public-house on the Chiswick bank” on the first page I opened is around one-in-10 million (10-7).
I checked my diary for the days immediately following the date of this event (23rd August 2018). My diary says that I would be meeting my publisher Robert Patterson to discuss a new book on Psychology and the Paranormal.. Was I perhaps on the lookout for anomalistic experience at this time? If so, I had been presented with a brilliant example.
The idea of writing this book meant that I would soon be seeking new material. Although I was at the early stages when this incident happened, I can imagine no more suitable an illustration for a book on anomalous experience than this very incident. Reflecting back on this period, I can see how helpful the coincidence was in resetting my paranormal ‘Belief Barometer’.
Enter – or, I should say, re-enter – Martin Gardner. Martin had kindly contributed Forewords to editions of my previous book on ‘psi’ (Marks and Kammann, 1980; Marks, 2000). Sadly, Martin died in 2010 leaving a huge legacy of 100s of literary and scholarly works with a readership of millions. I have copies of many of Martin’s books including Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science (Dover, 1957), Mathematics, Magic and Mystery (Dover, 1956), The Annotated Alice. The Definitive Edition. Lewis Carroll (W W Norton, 2000).
In researching TMWWTAN I made the discovery that Martin had written a Special Annotated Edition of TMWWTAN (Gardner and Chesterton, Ignatius Press, 1999). Goose bump territory! How very strange. Discovering this Special Annotated Edition seemed enigmatic and enthralling in equal measure. The three-way connection between Gilbert K Chesterton, Martin Gardner and the very book I am writing does not end here.
As Chesterton noted, “hardly anybody who looked at the title ever seems to have looked at the sub-title; which was “A Nightmare,” and the answer to a good many critical questions” (Autobiography, Kindle Locations 1301-1303). Two key themes of TMWWTAN are free will and evil. The Chiswick Coincidence triggered a change in my stance from disbelieving skeptic to neutral inquirer. My eyes were opened to the genius of Gilbert K Chesterton, certainly a special writer and TMWWTAN is no ordinary book. It has been rated as one of the greatest works of 20th century literature. To quote from the American Chesterton Society website (https://www.chesterton.org/who-is-this-guy/):
“Gilbert Keith Chesterton (1874-1936) cannot be summed up in one sentence. Nor in one paragraph…But rather than waiting to separate the goats from the sheep, let’s just come right out and say it: G.K. Chesterton was the best writer of the 20th century…The reason he was the greatest writer of the 20th century was because he was also the greatest thinker of the 20th century… What was it he defended? He defended “the common man” and common sense. He defended the poor. He defended the family. He defended beauty. And he defended Christianity and the Catholic Faith.”
I was pleasantly surprised to read the above description that GFK defended the “common man”, common sense and the poor, my own values exactly. Clearly, Gilbert Chesterton also made no secret of the fact that he believed in God, prayer and the afterlife.
Like GKC, and he also made no secret of it, Martin Gardner believed in God, prayer and the afterlife. In his autobiography, Martin stated he loved reading “anything by G. K. because of his never-ceasing emotions of wonder and gratitude to God, not only for such complicated things as himself, his wife, and the universe, but for such “tremendous trifles” (as he once called them) as rain, sunlight, flowers, trees, colours, stars, even stones that “shine along the road / That are and cannot be,” (Undiluted Hocus-Pocus.The Autobiography of Martin Gardner, 2013, p. 205).
GKC, together with the Basque philosopher and poet Miguel de Unamuno, were Martin’s two mentors. Martin’s autobiography mentions God no less than 128 times. According to Martin Gardner (2013):
“Just as knowing how a magic trick is done spoils all its wonder, so let us be grateful that wherever science and reason turn they plunge finally into stygian darkness. I am not in the least annoyed because I do not understand time and space, or consciousness, or free will, or evil, or why the universe is made the way it is. I am relieved beyond measure that I do not need to comprehend more than dimly the nature of God or an afterlife. I do not want to be blinded by truths beyond the capacity of my eyes and brain and heart. I am as contented as a Carnap with the absence of rational methods for penetrating ultimate mysteries” (p. 341).
For a lot of different reasons, and in completely unexpected ways, the Chiswick Coincidence opened my eyes. At a seventh layer, I find that the coincidence revealed another synchronicity: the shared values and beliefs of Martin Gardner, in many ways one of most precious mentors, and a man I could never have met, GKC, the author of the metaphysical thriller TMWWTAN.
Combined Probability of Seven Layers
I give estimates here of the probabilities for each layer followed by a combined probability estimate.
Layer 1: The probability that the estate agent and GKC himself are from a single family is estimated to be 10-3. This estimate takes into account the number of West London estate agencies (500+) and the chance that the agent that I had selected would have a strong familial connection with GKC, the central character in this episode.
Layer 2: The probability that my plan to visit the Chiswick riverside pub would be followed a few seconds later by seeing the words ‘public-house on the Chiswick bank ’on the first page of my kindle is estimated to be 10-7. This estimate takes into account the huge quantity of kindle text (in excess of 50 million words) that I could have selected to read on this occasion.
Layer 3:The probability that on the same visit to London I would be meeting my publisher Robert Patterson to discuss a new book is estimated to be 10-1 . This accords with the frequency of such meetings which is approximately once a year.
Layer 4:Taking into account the fact that no contract for the paranormal book existed at the time, the probability that the Chiswick Coincidence would be useful material for this book is estimated to be 10-1
Layer 5:Taking into account of the fact that, before this incident, I knew almost nothing about GKC, the probability that somebody I knew, somebody I regarded as a mentor, somebody who had written forewords to two of my books, Martin Gardner, would also be somebody who had written a Special Annotated Edition of TMWWTAN is estimated to be 10-4
Layer 6: The probability that lifelong personal values, to defend the “common man”, common sense and the poor, I later discovered to be GFK’s values is estimated to be 10-1 .
Layer 7: The synchronicity in values and beliefs between Martin Gardner and Gilbert K Chesterton, author of TMWWTAN, is estimated to be a certainty. Martin loved GKC’s writing and shared his values and beliefs.
In addition, it is necessary to consider the boundary conditions. Sitting on an aeroplane on a short-haul flight, offers a variety of activities, viz: doing nothing, doing a puzzle, watching a film, listening to music, snoozing, chatting, looking out of the window, drinking a tea or coffee, reading a non-kindle item (newspaper, magazine or book), or reading a kindle. I estimate the probability that I would have chosen to read my kindle on this occasion as one-in-ten ( 10-1 ).
The combined probability P of the seven synchronicities and the boundary condition is:
P = 10-3 X 10-7 X 10-1 X 10-1 X 10-4 X 10-1 X 1 X 10-1 = 10-18
= one in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000
i.e. one in one quintillion (a million, million, million) 
These odds are so astronomical in scale, one must consider the possibility of a paranormal explanation. Not to do so would seem irrational and contrary to science.
Explaining the Coincidence
How might this remarkable 7-layered coincidence, together with its impact and meaning, all be explained? Let’s consider the explanations that are available from each side of the theoretical divide.
Hypothesis 1 – N Theory Explanation: Coincidences are bound to occur every once in a while purely by chance.
From the perspective of N Theory, I give the first type of explanation. The nugget of the Chiswick Coincidence lies within Layer 2:
Event A: choosing by free will to go to the City Barge for lunch.
Event B: choosing by free will to read, only moments later, a story, I would soon discover, that contains an incident about a ‘public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’.
When considered independently, neither event is in any way extraordinary. Only their near simultaneity appears extraordinary. If I had read the passage a few months, weeks or even days previously or sometime later, I would have noted that I knew just such a place but would not have blinked an eyelid. Any Londoner is familiar with the experience of coming across familiar places in novels or movies.
It is necessary to consider the possibility of a hidden cause, something that might create the illusion of synchronicity when it isn’t really there. One possibility is that GKC may have been frequently mentioning things in and around Chiswick. In this case the coincidence might not be so odd after all. It is possible to test this hypothesis relatively easily. It is said that Chesterton was one of the most prolific writers of all time. He wrote around 80 books, several hundred poems, 200 short stories, 4000 essays, and several plays. I downloaded the Delphi Collected Works of GK Chesterton onto my kindle. Using the kindle search function I found that there only 7 occurrences of the word “Chiswick” in GKC’s Collected Works. This fact makes the Chiswick Coincidence seem even odder than before.
Another possibility that must be considered is that I had already seen the crucial passage on a previous occasion. This possibility can be safely eliminated for two different reasons. Firstly, if I had already seen this passage, I would already noticed the connection between one of my favourite riverside haunts and GFC’s mention of it. In this case, seeing it for a second time would not have seemed the least bit remarkable. Secondly, a kindle automatically remembers the point reached at a previous reading and obligingly opens the selected book at that page.
The ultimate skeptical explanation is possibly the most accurate. It says that coincidences are just – coincidences! A coincidence is a coincidence is a coincidence; a random, chance kind of thing. Something similar to the Chiswick Coincidence is occurring with someone somewhere almost every second of the day. When this extremely striking kind of coincidence occurs, it is bound to attract the experiencer’s attention. It is purely the wheels of chance turning and nothing else – once-in-a-blue-moon ‘Lady Luck’ and ‘Father Time’ jump into bed together and another coincidence sucker is born.
Hypothesis 2 – P Theory Explanation: Reverse causality by unconscious reading of the text triggers the decision to visit the pub on the Chiswick side of the river.
What of a paranormal interpretation? It is essential to air all possible explanations and the P Theory warrants a fair hearing. The two key elements of the Chiswick Coincidence remain :
Event A: deciding by free will to go to the City Barge for lunch.
Event B: deciding by free will to read, only moments later, a story, which contains an incident about a ‘public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’.
What about the possibility of reversed causality such that Event B occurs immediately before Event A. This P Theory explanation goes like this: I read the part of the story about the Chiswick pub by an unconscious process of clairvoyance, clairvoyantly seeing the text about a ‘public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’ inside my kindle. Reading this text at an unconscious level triggers my decision to go to the City Barge for lunch. Afterwards, at a conscious level, when I switch on the kindle and actually read the text, I feel a sense of wonderment and surprise. This is no coincidence at all – reading about the Chiswick pub naturally and logically led to my plan to visit it.
If one is open to psi processes as scientific possibilities, then there should be no problem in accepting the P Theory explanation. In fact the P Theory nails it. If the skeptic demurs that there is no evidence for clairvoyance, unconscious perception or reverse causality and it just cannot be so, the P Theorist might well retort: “Normally, yes, but on this occasion all three happened.” There is no rational way of resolving the matter; which interpretation one accepts rests entirely upon subjective judgement.
Summary and Conclusion
On a homeward journey, involving multiple free choices, a striking coincidence happened. The laws of chance suggest the odds against the Chiswick Coincidence are around one-quintillion-to-one. Both an ‘N Theory’ interpretation and a ‘P Theory’ interpretation remain logical possibilities. There can be no definitive method of proving which explanation is the correct one. This incertitude requires a neutral stance and a degree of humility about one’s reaction to striking anomalous experience.
My search for a scientific explanation was matched by an equally compelling realisation that there might not be one. Which interpretation is true cannot be decided by reason. Only personal preference –based on one’s a pre-existing bias – allows one to reach a definite conclusion.
 I freely acknowledge some readers may well view my ‘Chiswick Coincidence’ with skepticism. If for no other good reason, ‘One person’s coincidence can be another person’s yawn’; https://wordpress.com/post/coincidences.blog/251
 The reader is encouraged to explore personal coincidences using this method of ‘layer analysis’. Looking for layers of meaning enables one to grasp the full significance of a synchonicity.
 The City Barge is a 10-minute drive from Bedford Park, the “queer artificial village” of ‘Saffron Park’, that features in GKC’s novel.
 With the settings on the kindle as they were at that time, there are 4-5 kindle pages to every printed page.
 To specify these distributions, a large sample of data points with exact odds values would be required.
 Martin Gardner (Foreword to the Second Edition, Marks, 2000) wrote: “It will rank as one of the strongest and best exposés ever directed at the more outlandish claims of parapsychology”(p. 13).
 By comparison, Chesterton’s autobiography mentions ‘God’ 62 times.
 I share GKC’s values as listed but not his religious beliefs.
 A quintillion is cardinal number represented by 1 followed by 18 zeros (US) and by 1 followed by 30 zeros (UK). Here I use the US definition.
 I adopt this response from Gardner (2013) The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener (p. 235).
 Michael Thalbourne (2006) dismisses skeptical explanations based on chance “as a bottomless pit, able to swallow up each and every coincidence that does not already have a normal explanation.” The fact is, in regard to this coincidence, there is no fool-proof method to say whether the P Theory of the N Theory interpretation is correct. It comes down to making one’s own subjective evaluation.
The University of London (UL) is a complex, federal institution including University College London (UCL) the LSE, King’s College London and the London Business School. The University is the world’s oldest provider of academic awards through distance and flexible learning, dating back to 1858. The UL website proudly announces that it: “has been shortlisted for the International Impact Award at the 2018 Times Higher Education Awards, known as the ‘Oscars’ for higher education.
The academic context of an institution of the size and complexity of the UL is one of intense external and internal competition. These colleges compete fiercely for resources on a national and international stage. Many of them do exceedingly well. They are obsessed by their positions in various public league tables. For example, the Times Higher Education (2018) World University Rankings for 2019 place Imperial College, UCL, LSE and King’s at 9th, 14th, 26th and 38th places respectively in a table of 1250 universities. These rankings matter and the only game in town is to move up the table. Oxford and Cambridge are in first and second place, with Stanford, MIT, CalTech and the Ivy League universities not far behind.
Within UL itself, there is intense rivalry between the member colleges, the Medical Schools, the Schools and departments within those colleges, research groups and units within departments, and finally, between individual academics. The white heat of competition needs to be directly observed or experienced to be believed. Academics at every level are under huge and intense pressure to obtain research funding and to publish peer-reviewed papers in high-impact journals to raise the perceived status of their schools and departments, and to secure funding in the form of research grants and to do all of these things as quickly as possible. As a consequence, simply to stay in the race, each and every method that produces the most outstanding results will be tested and tried. Unfortunately, from time to time, this inevitably means that academics resort to fraudulent practices.
This always does harm; it harms patients, biomedicine and science. It also harms the reputations of the individuals concerned and their institutions. For this reason, information about scientific misconduct seldom finds its way into public arenas, yet it is a notable part of ‘behind the scenes’ academic history. In “Scientific misconduct and the myth of self-correction in science”, Stroebe, Postmes and Spears (2012) discuss 40 cases of fraud that occurred between 1974 and 2012. The majority occurred in Biomedicine and the only two UK cases were at UL. Academic institutions prefer to keep scientific fraud committed by their employees behind closed doors. Then with the inevitable leaks, news of ‘scandals’ creates headlines in the mainstream media. This means that academic responses to fraud are driven by scandals. To quote Richard Smith (2006): “They accumulate to a point where the scientific community can no longer ignore them and `something has to be done’. Usually this process is excruciatingly slow.”
There have been several examples of proven scientific misconduct involving fabrication and fraud at several esteemed colleges within London University. London University has been blighted with a high proportion of ‘celebrity’ fraud cases, a few of which are summarised below.
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON – BURT SCANDAL
Sir Cyril Burt at University College London claimed a child’s intelligence is mainly inherited and social circumstances play only a minor role. Burt was a eugenicist and he fabricated data in a manner that suggested the genetic theories of intelligence were confirmed. Burt’s research formed the basis of education policy from the 1920s until Burt died in 1971. Soon afterwards evidence of fraud began to seep out, as if from a leaky bucket.
Notable exposures were by Leon Kamin (1974) in his book, The science and politics of IQ and Oliver Gillie (1976, October 24) who claimed that “Crucial data was faked by eminent psychologist” in the Sunday Times
Burt was alleged to have invented results, assistants and authors to fit his theory that intelligence has primarily a genetic basis. It is widely accepted today that Burt was a fraudster although he still has defenders.
ROYAL FREE HOSPITAL – WAKEFIELD SCANDAL
A fraudulent article in The Lancet falsely linked the MMR vaccine to autism. The publicity about this scared large numbers of parents. Dr. Andrew J Wakefield and a team (1998) at the Royal Free Hospital and School of Medicine, UL, falsified their findings. This resulted in a substantial drop in vaccinations causing unnecessary deaths among thousands of unprotected children (e.g., Braunstein, 2012; Deere, 2012). In spite of significant public and scientific concerns, the Wakefield paper was not retracted until February 2010, 12 years after the original publication. The paper received 1330 citations in the 12-year period prior to retraction and 1260 citations since the retraction. The false evidence that MMR vaccine causes autism is widely cited to the present day, and the paper forms the backbone of an international anti-vaxxing campaign which Wakefield leads from Austin, Texas (Glenza, 2018).
ST GEORGE’S MEDICAL SCHOOL – PEARCE SCANDAL
Dr. Malcolm Pearce of St George’s Medical School, LU, claimed that a 29-year-old woman had given birth to a healthy baby after he had successfully relocated a five-week-old ectopic foetus into her womb (Pearce et al., 1994). The report excited worldwide interest and hope to thousands of women who are prone to pregnancies that start outside the uterus and end in miscarriage. However, Dr Pearce’s patient records had been tampered with, colleagues knew nothing of this astonishing procedure, and the mother could not be tracked down. Pearce had falsified his evidence. The GMC ruled that fraud had happened and struck off his name from the register. His fraud actually ended two careers.
BIRKBECK COLLEGE AND UCL SCANDAL
Turner (2018) describes a “a major research scandal, after an inquiry found that scientific papers were doctored over an eleven year period.” Professor David Latchman, Master of Birkbeck College and one of the country’s top geneticists, was accused of “recklessness” by allowing research fraud to take place at UCL’s Institute of Child Health. The report states that UCL launched a formal investigation after a whistleblower alleged fraud in dozens papers published by the Institute.
It is alleged that a panel of experts found that two scientists, Dr Anastasis Stephanou and Dr Tiziano Scarabelli, were guilty of research misconduct by manipulating images in seven published papers. Professor Latchman, a former Dean of the Institute, is cited as an author on all seven of the papers. In a paper published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, the panel said there was “clear evidence” of cloning, where parts of an image were copied and pasted elsewhere.
KING’S COLLEGE LONDON – PETERS AND BANERJEE SCANDAL
Another college in UL tainted by fraud is King’s College. According to the King’s College’s website (https://www.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/about/history/index.aspx) the College was founded in 1829 as a university college “in the tradition of the Church of England”. The first King’s Professor to gain prominence as a fraudster was Professor Timothy Peters, professor of clinical biochemistry at King’s College School of Medicine and Dentistry, who was found guilty of serious professional misconduct in 2001. He was given a severe reprimand by the General Medical Council (GMC) for failing to take action over falsified research published by a junior doctor he was supervising (Dyer, 2001).
Professor Peters had been the research supervisor of Dr Anjan Banerjee, a junior doctor at King’s College Hospital between 1988 and 1991. Dr Banerjee, aged 41, was suspended from practice by the GMC for 12 months in December 2000 for publishing fraudulent research (BMJ 2000;321:1429). When the GMC suspended him, he had already been suspended from his job as consultant surgeon at the Royal Halifax Infirmary as a result of unconnected allegations concerning financial fraud, and he resigned after the GMC suspension. In spite of everything, Dr Banerjee was awarded fellowships at three Royal Colleges and also the MBE! Nice work, if you can get it.
KING’S COLLEGE LONDON – HANS J EYSENCK AND R GROSSARTH-MATICEK SCANDAL
A recent publication in the Journal of Health Psychology, ‘Personality and fatal diseases: Revisiting a scientific scandal’ by Anthony Pelosi and editorial, ‘The Hans Eysenck affair: Time to correct the scientific record’ have triggered an investigation into 61 publications by the late Professor H J Eysenck and R Grossarth-Maticek.
Hans Eysenck did his doctorate at UCL under the supervision of Cyril Burt (see section above about the Burt Scandal).
My Open Letter to the President of King’s College, London, Professor David Byrne, draws attention to the 30-year old scandal concerning the dodgy data, impossible claims and dirty tobacco money that are the foundation of multiple dubious publications by Professor H J Eysenck and R Grossarth-Maticek’s. An investigation by KCL of these events is long overdue and a report of a review by KCL is currently awaited. Watch this space…
<Prof Hans J Eysenck Roland Grossarth-Maticek>
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON – AHLUWALIA SCANDAL
The Ahluwalia scandal is described in detail by Dr Geoff. It involved multiple acts of fraud. Jatinder Ahluwalia was obviously a very shrewd operator. In spite of getting found out on more than one occasion, Ahluwalia was able to gain employment in several prestigious institutions including Cambridge University, Imperial College London, UCL and the University of East London.
These cases indicate the relative ease with which the academic fraudster can accomplish fame and fortune at some of the most prestigious institutions in the land. The extremely poor record of the authorities at colleges in London University in discovering and calling out fraud is something to behold.
To be continued…
Anomalous experiences tend to jolt one out of one’s comfort zone, tell us interesting things about how the mind works. A vivid déjà vu, strange coincidence, or unexpected illusion can all be automatic attention-grabbers. Some of the oddest experiences are visual. When a large part of the visual field moves, the viewer can momentarily believe that they have moved in the opposite direction.
The most common example occurs when looking out of a stationary train window at a station, and a nearby train moves away, you erroneously perceive that your own (stationary) train is moving in the opposite direction. This experience can happen on the railway, the road, at sea or in space, and it can cause accidents (e.g. see https://safety4sea.com/relative-motion-illusion-leads-to-collision/).
The other day, driving along a busy A3 towards London on ‘autopilot’ (Vatansever, Menon and Stamatakis, 2017), I reached a set of traffic light. In the middle lane, my vehicle was boxed in all sides by other vehicles so that I could not myself see the traffic lights. Suddenly I felt as if my vehicle was being pulled backwards so that my car would impact the one behind, a potential disaster. I immediately slammed my foot on the brake and felt a surge of adrenaline. Thankfully, my perceptual-motor system quickly snapped back to reality – I realized that I was stationary and that the surrounding vehicles were moving forwards. Reset! In less than a second, my foot came off the brake and onto the accelerator. I had experienced the ‘Self Motion Illusion’ (Riecke, 2010).
My brain had falsely concluded that my vehicle was moving backwards. This is the natural response of a perceptual system with a default setting that expects constancy (Day, 1972). I wish to argue that perceptual constancy is based on a universal principle of ‘Psychological Homeostasis’ (Marks, 2018). When my perceptual world went haywire at the traffic lights, a rapid correctional ‘reset’ brought me back to my senses.
The rapidity of the reset is required to prevent a potential accident. This fact may be evidence of a general reset principle which is operating to produce equilibrium at each and moment in a conscious being. Alternatively the experience was reset by the fact that I saw the surrounding vehicles moving away around me. It is hard to say from a single uncontrolled experience.
Day, R. H. (1972). The basis of perceptual constancy and perceptual illusion. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 11(6), 525-532.
Marks, D. F. (2018). A General Theory of Behaviour. London: SAGE Publications.
Riecke, B. E. (2010). Compelling self-motion through virtual environments without actual self-motion–Using self-motion illusions (‘vection’) to improve VR user experience. Virtual reality. InTech.
Vatansever, D., Menon, D. K., & Stamatakis, E. A. (2017). Default mode contributions to automated information processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(48), 12821-12826.
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
Thanks for the visit!
I approach this blog site with a sense of anticipation, wondering where it may lead…
I hope it might lead towards light, new treasure, in the form of new knowledge and theory.
How can that be, you might well ask ? Surely, a so-called ‘expert’ must already have an opinion one way or the other about the paranormal? Wrong!
The truth is that I have no fixed ideas about which direction the evidence will lead.
One thing I do know – it is necessary to step beyond old assumptions, seek new objects of knowledge.
If we already KNOW the answer, the TRUTH, why would we bother to read, write or even THINK for that matter, because the truth must already be determined, already out there, written by somebody, somewhere and all that would be left to do would be to pick up dead learning.
Believers vs. Disbelievers
It is quickly apparent to any observer that the paranormal field is heavily divided between two armies of believers (so-called ‘sheep’) and skeptics (so-called ‘goats’ who are actually dis-believers) battling it out with no holds barred.
The stakes are high. The fight is not about empirical studies, observations and anecdotes. The very nature of science, life and reality are being contested.
There are ‘dead bodies’ and ‘unexploded land mines’ all over the place and one would be lucky to leave the field in one piece. One can surmise that there can only be losers, never winners, in this futile type of war. In the end every soldier in the affray is a loser. It’s an intellectual version of World War I with permanent trenches and barbed wire fences that has been waging for over a century.
I know this because I have been there on the battle field. I entered the field and did several tours of duty. Then, battle-weary with the affray, I walked away.
Recently I returned to see if anything has changed.
As I stuck my head over the trench top waving a white flag of peace, a few warning shots were fired. The same old battle is raging but with the difference that many new foot soldiers have been recruited and there have been scores of new studies over the last 20 years. These studies have been weaponised to provide increased power, precision and impact.
The army of non-believers now possesses a stockpile of findings consistent with scientific explanations of the paranormal. The believer army, meanwhile, has accrued an equally large stockpile supportive of paranormal interpretations.
White Flag of Neutrality
Offering the white flag of peace and neutrality causes no small amount of trepidation. Am I now to be a target for both sides – because, in the battle of the paranormal, nobody is permitted to be neutral? It’s a ‘do or die’ scenario like no other in science.
The blog posts here are written from a dispassionate point of view. If I am passionate about anything, it is about the importance of neutrality. My purpose is to create a balanced and even-handed review based on the best contemporary evidence on paranormal claims in science and medicine.
I present here the evidence, both pro and con, explain the relevant psychological processes, present scientific arguments, and produce a final balance sheet at the end.
Thanks for visiting. The Roots of Coincidence is the title of Arthur Koestler’s famous book. I use the image from Koestler’s book cover as a logo. Here we explore what those roots might be.
We examine Koestler’s theories, and explore theories of our own.
The aim is to collect as many stories as possible about coincidences, those strange experiences in which two events appear to be connected:
A dream or daydream that predicts something that actually happens
A phone call out of the blue from a person you had just thought of
A passage in a book about something you had just been thinking about
An uncanny event that is linked to something you did, felt or thought
Or something else altogether that just struck you as surprising.
For some reason or another – I really don’t know why – I experience a lot of coincidences. I will share a few of them here.
Your accounts of your own coincidence experiences are warmly welcome here. No need to give your name if you don’t want to. I will be pleased to publish them under your chosen pseudonym.
Please add them as comments or send an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Who knows, perhaps we can even explain how and why these experiences happen.
To get into the swing of things, let’s start with a real humdinger: ‘An obscure public-house on the Chiswick bank of the river’.
The world is full of contradictions, inconsistencies and inequities. On the one hand, it has been reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO, 2015) that 805million people are estimated to be chronically undernourished. Yet, it has been estimated that the volume of food produced is more than one and a half times what is needed to provide everybody on the planet with a nutritious diet (Weis, 2007). It is not about lack, it is about inequity. While 805 million starve, we also know that 1460 million are overweight or obese, and that number is increasing.
There is also water scarcity with 1.2 billion people lacking access to clean drinking water and 2.5 billion people having no access to a toilet, less than the number of people with a mobile phone (United Nations, 2015). As the world population increases from 7.3 billion today to around 9.6 billion in 2050 (+31.5%), the supply of fresh drinking water available will remain about the same. Yet, around 70 per cent of the world’s water is used in agriculture. Annual grain crops are planted on about 70 per cent of the world’s cropland and provide 80per cent of the world’s food (Pimentel et al., 2012), 70 per cent of which is stock feed for farm animals, which in turn produce dairy and meat.
Over the next 25 years, a lot more food will be needed for the extra 31.5 per cent and the only way it can be produced is through agriculture, creating a vicious circle. The FAO (2015) predicts that the global demand for livestock products will increase by 70 per cent by 2050 with an estimated 1 billion poor depending on livestock for food and income. The livestock sector contributes to human-induced Greenhouse Gas emissions for 14.5 per cent and is a large user of natural resources, especially water.
As Father Time waves his sickle over the remaining decades of this century, there will be a worsening water scarcity. Thanks in part to a ready supply of beef burgers, fried chicken, milk, eggs and cola. Many recent editorials in medical and scientific journals have addressed issues relating to food, diets and dieting (e.g. Drewnowski, 2014; Edmonds and Templeton, 2013; Fitzgerald, 2014; Gold and Graham, 2011; Ndisang et al., 2014; Pagadala and McCullough, 2012; Potenza, 2014; Sniehotta et al., 2014; Stuckler and Basu, 2013; The PLoS Medicine Editors, 2012; Yanovski, 2011).
The Special Issue on ‘Food, Diets and Dieting’ provides a state-of-the-art overview of psychological studies by international researchers on this topic area. The Call for Papers for a Special Issue on ‘Food, Diets and Dieting’ was timely; we received unprecedented interest with many high-quality submissions. Following peer review, the number of accepted papers finally reached the total of 42. The contributions have been divided into two sets for publication in the May and June 2015 issues of Special Issue: Food, diets and dieting. These publications in Journal of Health Psychology are complemented in our companion, open access journal, Health Psychology Open, by a theoretical review paper and a series of commentary papers (Marks, 2015).
According to the McKinsey Global Institute (2014) obesity is responsible for around 5 per cent of global deaths and the global economic impact is US$2.0trillion, or 2.8per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP), roughly equivalent to the impact from smoking or armed violence, war and terrorism. In the United States, in 2004, direct and indirect health costs associated with obesity were US$98 billion. That figure probably has doubled by now.
Depending on the source, it is reported that the direct medical cost of overweight and obesity combined has been estimated to be 5–10per cent of the US health care spend. 42million children under the age of 5 were overweight or obese in 2013. Prevalence of overweight or obesity in adults doubled from 6 per cent in 1980 to 12 per cent in 2008. By 2050, it is predicted that obesity will affect 60 per cent of adult men, 50 per cent of adult women and 25per cent of children making the United States, Britain and much of Europe a mainly obese society.
Globalization is Driver
The main driver of the obesity epidemic and increased prevalence of other non-communicable diseases is unregulated corporate globalization (Swinburn et al., 2011). From the point of view of human health, globalization flies a banner of progress and freedom yet brings illness and an early death to millions of people with non-communicable ‘diseases of affluence’. Transnational corporations are scaling up their promotion of tobacco, alcohol, cola and other sugary beverages, ultra-processed food and unhealthy commodities generally throughout low- and middle-income countries. Moodie et al. (2013) have observed that sales of unhealthy commodities across 80 low- and middle-income countries are strongly interrelated. They argue that wherever there are high rates of tobacco and alcohol consumption, there are also a high intake of snacks, soft drinks, processed foods and other unhealthy food commodities. Moodie et al. (2013) argued that the alcohol and ultra-processed food and drink industries are using similar strategies to the tobacco industry to undermine effective public health policies and programmes. Furthermore, it is suggested that unhealthy commodity industries should have no role in the formation of national or international policy for non-communicable disease policy. Therefore, it follows that the only evidence-based mechanisms that can prevent harm caused by unhealthy commodity industries are public regulation and market intervention.
The work of Drewnowski and others has demonstrated a strong relationship between affordability of food and beverages and their energy density measured in terms of fat and sugar (Drewnowski, 2014; Drewnowski and Specter, 2004). A systematic review of 27 studies across 10 countries showed that a healthful diet costs around US$550 per year more than an unhealthy one (Rao et al., 2013). In England, another study suggested that the healthiest dietary pattern costs double the price of the least healthy, costing £6.63/day and £3.29/day, respectively (Morris et al., 2014). That is a difference of £1219 per annum.
The inverse relationship between income and prevalence of overweight and obesity follows from two related facts: (a) cheaper foods and drinks are energy-dense and (b) a healthful diet is unaffordable for the majority of people. In 2008, an estimated 1.46 billion adults worldwide had a body mass index (BMI) of 25kg/m2 or greater, and of these, 205million men and 297million women were obese. Taking into account, the rate of increase in obesity, this half-billion figure is projected to increase at least 30 per cent by 2050. The World Health Organization (WHO) (2014) estimates that around 3.4million adults die each year as a result of overweight or obesity. The WHO (2013) published a plan to halt the rise in diabetes and obesity as a part of a vision: ‘A world free of the avoidable burden of noncommunicable diseases’. WHO interventions revolve around ‘mobilizing sustained resources Marks 471 … in coordination with the relevant organizations and ministries’ which consists of high-level meetings between governmental representatives and publishing position statements.
Evidence and logic suggest that economic prosperity is the enabler for obesity and, furthermore, leading authorities have concluded that Obesity is the result of people responding normally to the obesogenic environments they find themselves in. Support for individuals to counteract obesogenic environments will continue to be important, but the priority should be for policies to reverse the obesogenic nature of these environments. (Swinburn et al., 2011) Policy reversals to reduce obesogenicity by regulation face robust resistance from the food and drinks industry. Yet without regulation to change the price imbalance between unhealthful and healthful foods, the obesity epidemic is unlikely to go away. In the meantime, hundreds of millions of individuals continue inexorably along the path of overweight and obesity, with the associated unpleasant illnesses and an early death. It follows that health care systems must be competent to offer effective interventions to prevent, treat and ameliorate the impact of overweight or obesity. Authorities decree that a ‘balanced diet’ with regular physical activity is of crucial importance to a healthy body. Yet, in spite of thousands of studies, hundreds of campaigns and scores of dedicated institutes and journals based on this creed, there are currently no validated public health interventions able to achieve sustained long-term weight loss. Today, the muchtouted idea of the ‘balanced diet’ seems little more than worn out myth. Some basic questions require answers: What is causing the obesity epidemic? What can be done about it? and What is the role of health psychologists (if any)? (Marks et al., 2015; Marks, in press). The obesity epidemic is comparable in importance to the smoking epidemic. Arguably, it will prove to be even more significant in human history than smoking. It took 50 years of consolidated pressure to reduce the prevalence of smoking related diseases. Progress has been frustratingly slow. Still, in 2015, only one industrialized country in the world has plain or standard packaging of cigarettes (Australia) with a second one planning to follow next year (England). With no significant interventions on the horizon for obesity prevention, for example, unhealthful food taxation, the obesity epidemic can continue unabated to run its course, until food and water shortages have their ultimate impact on human society.
Enough Knowledge Now to Tackle Obesity
There is enough knowledge now to tackle the obesity epidemic. Unfortunately our political leaders lack the spine to do what is necessary. Our market-led governance is in the pocket of the paymasters who influence the election of our presidents and prime ministers. If the food chain could be rationally developed, the food and water crises could be curbed within two decades from now. This Special Issue contains a collection of in-depth psychological studies on food, diets and dieting. These studies are relevant to the issue of why certain foods are eaten or avoided by individual consumers and how the choices of consumers are influenced by family, social and economic conditions. Diets and dietary changes involve complex systems of variables which operate on a mass scale. Improved understanding of psychological functioning around food, diets and dieting holds one key to improving nutritional health. A better understanding of behaviour alone is not enough; changes to the food environment are also necessary. Our governmental leaders need to wake up, loosen their ties to their industrial paymasters and take effective action.
Drewnowski A (2014) Healthy diets for a healthy planet. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 99(6): 1284–1285.
Drewnowski A and Specter SE (2004) Poverty and obesity: The role of energy density and energy costs. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 79(1): 6–16.
Edmonds EW and Templeton KJ (2013) Childhood obesity and musculoskeletal problems: Editorial Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 471(4): 1191–1192.
Fitzgerald DA (2014) Mini-symposium: Childhood obesity and its impact on respiratory wellbeing: Editorial title: Childhood obesity is the global warming of healthcare. Paediatric Respiratory Reviews 15(3): 209–284.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2014) The State of Food Insecurity in the World: Strengthening the Enabling Environment for Food Security and Nutrition. Rome: FAO. Available at: http:// http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4030e.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (2015) Livestock and the environment. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ livestock-environment/en/
Gold MS and Graham NA (2011) Editorial: Hot topic: Food Addiction & Obesity Treatment Development (Executive Guest Editors: Mark S Gold and Noni A Graham). Current Pharmaceutical Design 17(12): 1126–1127.
McKinsey Global Institute (2014) Overcoming obesity: An initial economic analysis. Discussion paper. London. Available at: http://www. munideporte.com/imagenes/documentacion/ ficheros/025183D9.pdf
Marks DF (2015) Homeostatic theory of obesity. Health Psychology Open. Marks DF, Murray M, Evans B, et al. (2015) Health Psychology: Theory, Research and Application (4th edn). London: SAGE.
Moodie R, Stuckler D, Monteiro C, et al. (2013) Profits and pandemics: Prevention of harmful effects of tobacco, alcohol, and ultraprocessed food and drink industries. The Lancet 381(9867): 670–679.
Morris MA, Hulme C, Clarke GP, et al. (2014) What is the cost of a healthy diet? Using diet data from the UK Women’s Cohort Study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 68(11): 1043–1049.
Ndisang JF, Vannacci A and Rastogi S (2014) Oxidative stress and inflammation in obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and related cardiometabolic complications. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity 2014: 506948.
Pagadala MR and McCullough AJ (2012) Editorial: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and obesity: Not all about BMI. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 107: 1859–1861.
Pimentel D, Cerasale D, Stanley RC, et al. (2012) Annual vs. perennial grain production. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 161: 1–9.
Potenza MN (2014) Obesity, food, and addiction: Emerging neuroscience and clinical and public health implications. Neuropsychopharmacology 39(1): 249–250.
Rao M, Afshin A, Singh G, et al. (2013) Do healthier foods and diet patterns cost more than less healthy options? A systematic review and metaanalysis. BMJ Open 3: e004277.
Sniehotta FF, Simpson SA and Greaves CJ (2014) Weight loss maintenance: An agenda for health psychology. British Journal of Health Psychology 19: 459–464.
Stuckler D and Basu S (2013) Getting serious about obesity. BMJ: British Medical Journal 346: f1300.
Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall KD, et al. (2011) The global obesity pandemic: Shaped by global drivers and local environments. The Lancet 378(9793): 804–814.
The PLoS Medicine Editors (2012) PLoS Medicine series on Big Food: The food industry is ripe for scrutiny. PLoS Medicine 9(6): e1001246.
United Nations (2015) Water Scarcity. Available at: http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/scarcity. shtml
Weis T (2007) The Global Food Economy. London: Zed Books. World Health Organisation (WHO) (2014) Obesity and overweight. Fact Sheet No 311. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/ fs311/en/http://www.who.int/mediacentre/ factsheets/fs311/en/
World Health Organization (WHO) (2013) Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases 2013–2020. Geneva: WHO.
Yanovski SZ (2011) Obesity treatment in primary care – Are we there yet. New England Journal of Medicine 365(21): 2030–2031.
First published in the Journal of Health Psychology 2015
A General Theory of Behavior is an innovative and promising new theory that integrates the long tradition of investigations on homeostasis with contemporary research in such diverse areas as emotion, addiction and sleep. A truly original and wide-ranging study of human nature, this book will be foundational for anyone who considers the importance of theory for modern psychology.