If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public
Discourse on Matters of Public Health To : All participants and readers of sci.med, misc.health.alternative, uk.people.health, talk.politics.medicine Please be aware that many comments and responses posted to this forum are not those of casual posters interested in an honest exchange. A number of individuals with ties to industry are attempting to shape public thinking about the risks of mainstream medicine while attacking the benefits and validity of natural medicine. I refer to these individuals broadly as "Pharma-bloggers" (see footnote). For obvious reasons, pharma-bloggers on usenet don't promote a specific company or product, as might be the case with standard "blogging" on a weblog, but there is a common thread between industry blogging in a web blog and industry participation in a newsgroup: both are done under the pretense that the poster is not professionally affiliated. Most of these people are likely to be associated with a PR project whose "blogging" efforts are underwritten anonymously by the media or marketing groups of industry. They are not difficult to identify due to specific patterns in their posting. Please familiarize yourself with these tactics so you can identify them. See: http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/2003Q1/monger.html See: http://emord.com/stories/cherish.htm What to look for while participating in usenet newsgroups: 1. Pharmabloggers on usenet use intimidation, mockery, and insults to silence those who express belief or interest in natural medicine. They actively discourage a scientific discussion and disrupt ongoing discussions that explore alternative treatments in healthcare. 2. Pharmabloggers on usenet attack those who question the effectiveness of mainstream medicine, asserting that disease-management "healthcare" is the only viable form of treatment. Their comments are frequently embedded in pseudo-scientific jargon, but without supporting scientific documentation. 3. Pharmabloggers on usenet post the majority of their responses simply to bury the comments of others; they also strive obsessively to have the last word. 4. Pharmabloggers on usenet are much faster at posting than casual participants; they almost always respond first to a new thread, question, or observation. 5. Pharmabloggers on usenet use a "pile on" tactic to create an aura of the "consensus view" in an effort to isolate posters who disagree with them. You will experience this if you express a belief in natural medicine or holistic healing. You will also see this tactic used more often than any other. 6. Pharmabloggers on usenet refute numerous quality studies published in major medical journals showing the benefits of natural medicine applied in naturopathic healthcare, including nutrient supplementation, exercise, stress reduction, biofeedback, accupuncture, accupressure, reflexology, and other approaches. You can find the science supporting a variety of natural medicine methods at http://www.newstarget.com. 7. Pharmabloggers on usenet frequently refer readers to "quack-busting" websites designed to attack natural medicine approaches and their proponents. Under the guise of "consumer protection," the extreme bias of these promoters belies their true motives and reveals their ties to industry. 8. Pharmabloggers on usenet rely on junk science references to support their attacks on natural healing methods. They decline to provide meaningful scientific references in support of their defense of most conventional treatments. Since most conventional medicines are either marginally effective, unproven, or dangerous, it is not suprising that purely anecdotal or observational studies (usually sponsored by the drug makers) are the only "science" available to them. 9. Pharmabloggers on usenet assert that conventional medicine is "evidence based," however the lack of corroborating science disproves that claim. Chemotherapy drugs, for instance, are unproven in the majority of cancers, yet FDA permits these drugs to remain in use as "experimental trial" medications, as has been the case for more than thirty years. For most cancer patients, there is no proven benefit in the use of these expensive and toxic chemicals. 10. Pharmabloggers on usenet ignore iatrogenic studies that show the dangerous side effects of prescription drugs (ie., at least 100,000 deaths annually), as well as a 20% recall for all previously approved drugs. They also ignore hundreds of studies showing a disease relationship to use of such drugs and other unsafe medical treatments. Tip: If you find yourself engaging a poster whose defense of mainstream medicine is unusually dramatic in tone, or inexplicably vicious toward others, and if that response is an attempt to attack natural medicine, you can be sure you have stumbled upon a PR grunt whose mission is preventing a critical mass of consumer awareness about disinformation regarding matters of public health. Unfortunately, there are more of these individuals posting to usenet on a daily basis than almost anyone else, which is why I am posting this alert. If you find it odd that so few people on health-related usenet newsgroups are expressing an interest in natural medicine, it isn't because they aren't there, it's because they have been intimidated into silence. The pharma-bloggers have over-run the various newsgroups with their industrial brand of dogma, mockery, and ridicule. Many casual posters are simply frightened away, which is the objective of these PR-sponsored media grunts. * From Wikipedia: "An internet forum is not a blog (technically speaking), but a blog can function as an internet forum. Internet forums typically allow any user to post (into the discussion). Blogs typically limit posting to the blogger or to the blogger and approved others. The distinction between blogs and forums is sometimes gray. Sites such as Slashdot, Indymedia and Daily Kos combine elements of the two...many bloggers differentiate themselves from the mainstream media, WHILE OTHERS ARE MEMBERS OF THAT MEDIA WORKING THROUGH A DIFFERENT CHANNEL. SOME INSTITUTIONS SEE BLOGGING AS A MEANS OF "GETTING AROUND THE FILTER" AND PUSHING MESSAGES DIRECTLY TO THE PUBLIC. Some critics worry that bloggers respect neither intellectual property nor the role of the mass media in presenting society with credible news...A blog is a website in which items are posted on a regular basis and displayed in reverse chronological order...Blogs use a conversational style of documentation. Often blogs focus on a particular "area of interest", such as Washington, D.C.'s political goings-on. Some blogs discuss personal experiences." While the advent of blogging was preceded by newsgroups, there are many similiarities between posters in these venues. Primarily, the two are distinguished by differences in their software platforms, not by the uniqueness of published content. Please note that I did not refer to the newsgroup itself as a weblog, I referred to individual posters as "blogging" here on behalf of industry. While my focus is on nutrition and science, the pharmabloggers rely on semantic and personal attacks in their effort to distract from the real issues. Pharmablogger: An individual who uses the Internet, and Usenet newsgroups, to: 1) promote and defend maintstream medicine and disease management; 2) attack those who express a favorable view of natural medicine; and 3) cite a variety of junk medical science funded by industry for the purpose of establishing markets for marginally effective, and often dangerous, medical products and devices. Typically, such references are by inference only, so as to avoid linking directly to promotional material on the drug makers' websites, which would make their ties to industry too obvious. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact thePublic Discourse on Matters of Public Health
PeterB wrote:
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." Petey, I hope one day that someone takes pity on you and writes a song of the quality of the Edmund Fitzgerald about your shipwreck. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health
"PeterB" wrote in message ups.com... WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health To : All participants and readers of sci.med, misc.health.alternative, uk.people.health, talk.politics.medicine ..... None of those groups are blogs. (you claiming otherwise makes you look like an idiot) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Warning, was "WARNING: Industry"
The last time this was posted the author was asked to provide an example
by which this "shotgun" approach could be illustrated, it is of yet not forthcoming. What this, putting the best possible face on it, is an attempt to head off critical looks at the "alterblogger" posts which push products of dubious utility from the big "alternative" industry with income in the multiple billions per year. When an example is provided then this can be a serious discussion but now remains as before propaganda of "sour grapes" produced on a failure of scientific facts to support many of the "alterblogger" claims. Those claims must stand on their own merit, not the false support of stick jabbing at what can be scientifically supported. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health
"HCN" wrote in message . .. "PeterB" wrote in message ups.com... WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health To : All participants and readers of sci.med, misc.health.alternative, uk.people.health, talk.politics.medicine .... None of those groups are blogs. (you claiming otherwise makes you look like an idiot) Claiming that the statement inferred that the News Groups are / were Blogs is outright ignorance. FYI Blogging a News Group is posting information on a News Group that one would expect and see on a personal (or paid) agenda blog. DDUUUHHHH |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health
vernon wrote: "HCN" wrote in message . .. "PeterB" wrote in message ups.com... WARNING: Industry Is Blogging these NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health To : All participants and readers of sci.med, misc.health.alternative, uk.people.health, talk.politics.medicine .... None of those groups are blogs. (you claiming otherwise makes you look like an idiot) Claiming that the statement inferred that the News Groups are / were Blogs is outright ignorance. FYI Blogging a News Group is posting information on a News Group that one would expect and see on a personal (or paid) agenda blog. DDUUUHHHH Welcome back -- I thought you might be on vacation. You're right, it's a description of the activity, not the medium. I guess I could have used "pharmaflogging," but knowing they hate "pharmablogger" more, I'll stick with that. PeterB |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Warning, was "WARNING: Industry"
Richard Schultz wrote: In misc.health.alternative wrote: : The last time this was posted the author was asked to provide an example : by which this "shotgun" approach could be illustrated, it is of yet not : forthcoming. When has the author been forthcoming about *anything*? Have you posted a new thread with your links as requested, or will you make excuses for not having my address for postal delivery? We wouldn't want anyone to think you weren't forthcoming, would we pharmboy? PeterB |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Warning, was "WARNING: Industry"
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Warning, was "WARNING: Industry"
"I don't push products, I merely point out the differences between drugs
and nutrients. And if industry size is the issue, the dietary supplement industry is but a small fraction the size of the drug business." You push propaganda in support of the marketers. The "alternative" market is very big business, many times the size of other familiar ones. The point was that commercial intrest in aquiring even more billions then it does now is also with this industry. "If you mean claims that natural medicine is more effective in treating disease than drugs, there is evidence to support those comments. A review of the history of my posts will show several hundred references in the past year alone, plus Roman Bystrianyk posts similar articles here on an almost daily basis." Because you cross posted this mindless slam against imagined windmills I don't see your posts as "here" is not where I saw you for the first time a couple of weeks ago with the first go round of this topic. Please do show me some examples of the broad sweeping claim above. I don't care to track your posts from other newsgroups. If you post so much then many should be at your fingertips. If it be so easy then I will pick the area, illustrate your claims with diabetes. "By contrast, when asked for risk-adjusted outcomes for various pharmaceutical drugs, you remain conspicuously silent. BTW, it's considered bad form to change another poster's subject header. If you can't argue the facts, changing the header isn't going to make your case." I think you have me confused with another, I ahve never before interacted with you to my knowledge before your first post on this topic as above. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WARNING: Industry is Blogging These Newsgroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health | PeterB | General Discussion | 102 | November 29th, 2006 04:19 PM |
TC, once again, public announces his idiocy. | Mr. Natural-Health | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | April 8th, 2006 08:35 PM |
my fitday public journal | Aquarijen | General Discussion | 1 | August 10th, 2004 04:21 PM |