Background: A review of the facts (see Dean-Mather's Invitation on Astrological Research:) shows that 1) half the population of Western countries reads sun sign columns at least sometimes, 5% take them seriously and 1% read them often and take them very seriously (Skeptical Inquirer, 1992); 2) well designed observational studies with adequate statistical power have failed to support the tropical sun sign hypothesis that postulates a correlation between personality character traits and natal Sun signs (Recent Advances in Natal Astrology: A Critical Review 1900-1976, 1977); and 3) experimental studies using human subjects are impossible to conduct to test this hypothesis. From this evidence we conclude that: 1) there is a very real and deeply ingrained human need of archetypal proportions to belief in metaphysical causation; and 2) "the sun-sign idea is simply not valid" (The Validity of Astrological Theory, 1984), at least as tested so far.
Alternative paradigm: A few centuries ago the radio wave hypothesis was not falsifiable. Today it is a valid fact. The difference: development of adequate instruments of observation. The intrinsic limitation of the scientific method is that there is never a FINAL and absolute validity determination on any hypothesis because its validity may change with new evidence.
It is possible that the analogy holds true for the tropical Sun sign hypothesis. We may lack the adequate instruments of observation to assess the age of the incarnating human soul (see Alan Leo's Esoteric Astrology). Of course, the theory of reincarnation is itself an unproven hypothesis. However, if the principle of reincarnation operates it would introduce a serious bias not previously considered in Sun sign research. In the same way that international mortality rates comparisons need to be "age-adjusted" for us to draw valid inferences about the health and disease status among countries, tropical Sun sign research design may need to include a soul age-adjustment factor. Younger souls may handle Sun sign energies differently than more mature souls, thus introducing a significant source of bias. On the average no differences would be observed if the analysis is not stratified by this potential confounding factor.
Research proposal: At present we do not know of any reliable and objective way to assess the age of the human soul. Therefore our hypothesis remains unfalsifiable until adequate instruments of observation are developed. However, social class, as used in epidemiological studies in Great Britain, may be considered as an imperfect proxy for the age of the human soul. In general, and with increasingly more pervasive exceptions as we all progress towards more egalitarian societies world-wide, more mature souls may be expected to be born, raised or to live among higher social classes and the reverse is expected to occur with younger ones. Epidemiological research in Great Britain has extensively documented a strong correlation between social class and disease status.
Our proposal consists of conducting an observational study (case-control design) using computerized hospital discharge data of a representative sample of hospitalizations in Great Britain for a given period (the earlier period the better as the correlation of social class with the age of the human soul would be expected to be stronger in the past than in the present or future). Such computerized hospital discharge records should provide, at least, access to the following variables: 1) month/day/year of birth (and of hospitalization, if possible); race/ethnicity/country of origin; gender, occupation/social class proxy, and the International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes for the primary and secondary reasons for hospitalization. It is crucial to identify if several hospitalizations belong to the same individual during the study period (individuals versus events) in the data set. Well defined medical and surgical diagnoses (using ICD) such as diabetes, myocardial infarct, appendectomy,etc. will be used.
Null Hypothesis: Natal tropical Sun signs (the "exposures") are randomly distributed among individuals requiring hospitalization in Great Britain. Therefore, compared with individuals not having Disease Y, the relative risk of Disease Y (as approximated by the exposure odds ratio in a case control study design where the rare disease assumption holds) is 1.0 for individuals born in sun sign X.
Brief Study Protocol: The analyses will stratify by social class and gender, and will be restricted to adults 30 years of age or older. The sun sign distributions will then be further adjusted for demographic (birth cohort) and astronomical (orbit) corrections. Sample size will be limited by availability of computerized hospital discharge records. Assuming specificity of effect, that is, that only one sun sign will be associated with an increased risk of a given disease or surgical condition, and having approximately 5 controls (not having Disease Y but hospitalized for other diseases) per case, a rough sample size of 600 cases and 3,000 controls BY GENDER AND SOCIAL CLASS STRATUM would be needed to find an increased risk of 50% (odds ratio=1.5) with an 80% study power at a significance level (type 1 error) of less than 0.05. The selection bias inherent in using hospitalized controls (see: classical British case-control studies on lung cancer and smoking by Dunn) would be addressed in a further refined study protocol.
Stratified by gender and social class, | Disease "Y" | Other |
and restricted by age | | Diseases |
----------------------------------------|---------------|------------|
Sun Sign "X" | 12% | 8% |
All other sun signs | 88% | 92% |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
100% 100%
Conclusion: We find it both unethical and invalid to continue using Sun sign astrology for commercial purposes. We agree that "testable claims are often made, so their truth or falsity is an empirical matter to be established by research, not proclaimed by fiat or simply ignored." (Astrological Journal, 1996). However, we disagree with the proposition that we may be ever able "to devise a test that will show whether those ideas are right or wrong." It is well known that the result of any statistical test is not a personal conviction but a probabilistic statement of certainty. It is not within the scope of science to "prove" ideas right or wrong. It is within the scope of science to challenge the testable claims originating from those ideas, even more forcefully if such claims are used to misinform the gullible for commercial purposes.
We believe in the psychological causation of disease and consider astrological energies to be part of the individual's psychological makeup. Rigorous epidemiological research in medical astrology may present us the opportunity to examine more objectively defined effects of astrological energies that so far have eluded serious investigators in this field. However, we are concerned about the unethical use of such knowledge, if found valid, by health insurance companies and others. The mapping of the human genome is already presenting such ethical dilemma. Something similar is to be expected if the key to medical astrology (psychogenetics) is discovered.
References:
The Validity of Astrological Theory, PhD Thesis, London University, March 1984, 246.
Skeptical Inquirer 1992, 16, 344-347.
Astrological Journal May/June 1996 pp 143-155.
THOTh, last revised 03NOV96