 |
 |
hi wendy At 21:51 1998/11/15 -0700, you wrote: >I must also beg to differ once again with some of these >"snake-oil" attacks on people's characters. Frankly, I >do not include myself amongst any sort of list "police" >groups, of any sort. i do, when i catch someone deliberately concealing their financial interest >I am all for critical thinking and investigating all >claims made here, but that means ALL claims made. whew! you have more energy than me! i only have time to dig into deliberately concealed financial interest >I do sense an overwhelming bias against alternative treatments you couldn't be more wrong, if you are referring to me; see my prior messages 'let's get this straight' >and sometimes docile, almost mindless acceptance >of ideas and treatments either proposed or endorsed >by standard western medical experts. we do the best with the systems that we the society have allowed or required to be put into place a doctor or a drug company or an aroma therapist all have financial interest in their work, granted and there's nothing wrong with that as long as is not deliberately concealed financial interest >No one seems to go after any of the traditional western MD's >or pharmaceutical companies with the same zealousness reserved >for those who ideas or proposed treatments are more on the >fringe. I have seen lists of drugs posted here many times, sometimes >with info making it clear that there's a profit motive involved, >sometimes not. I do not think either side's motives are any more >nor any less good/bad or selfish/unselfish. we have many list-members with declared financial interests in their work as it relates to pd or to other areas i prefer the honest approach, myself >Has anyone stopped to consider that maybe some of these >people got into the promotion of certain products for profit, >only after having used them themselves, or having seen them >used for others that they know. i certainly stop and consider [usually long and hard] before i send in any message here >Personally, I think combining the ability to make some money, >ALONG WITH a product in which one believes completely, is a >wonderful combination. yep, nothing better! i think it's called answering your call or something like that >For instance, down the road, I've thought of also combining >my environmental interests with a business. That might include >alternatives to traditional pest control, alternative medicines, >nutritional supplements, etc. go for it! >I would be VERY offended, to say the least, if perhaps I were >able to cure myself of PD via nutritional supplements and diet, >and then had people attacking my character and motives later if >I then decided to share this which had worked for me with others >for a profit. If I found a vitamin/herb treatment program that >worked for me, I'd love to just give it away, but since I'm not >Bill Gates, I could hardly afford to do that. Thus self-interest >comes into play too out of necessity. People should make their >profit-making intentions clear, I agree. To be consistent then, >there should also be alot more policing of the doctors, drug >companies, and ALL OTHER groups who post here. i don't follow your logic here if a doctor or drug company or dietician or pharmacist have posted here without deliberately concealing their financial interest why should they be 'policed'? >I also take issue that when there are possible personal/corporate >gains to be made on something alternative, that self-interest >automatically also confers upon the product the label of snake-oil. >Every drug or treatment ever discussed here would fall into that >category, if profit alone is the criteria. this is an absolutely nonsensical idea, i agree with you! again, see my 'let's get this straight' messages >Again, as I said above, and on an earlier post, not only might >this person truly believe in this product due to personal >experience, but also, they may have some very altruistic >plans for those profits. Any business that I undertake >would be something that was in line with my personal interests >/issues, and also the profits I received would not only support >me, but also help me to even further support those same issues. absolutely! if you had such a business and acted on your ideals in such a way i believe that you'd sing your sales pitch from the rooftops and would not deliberately conceal your financial interest >So, let's all maintain both critical and open >minds. They are not mutually exclusive. my mind is always open and my mind is always critical it's the only way i can function >There are also ways to challenge someone without attacking >their integrity and motives, especially prematurely. "once bitten, twice shy" = once or twice or thrice scammed by deliberately dishonest behaviour = extra sensitive, and so far, extra accurate, radar for me; not pre-mature here at all in my analysis >Let's also make sure this critical analysis and >investigation is applied equally all-around. again, if you have the energy, go for it! i can only drum up the energy to deal with the things that 'speak' to me, like dishonesty >And finally, let's avoid reducing issues >to cliches like "snake-oil", etc. the 'issue' here is deliberately concealed financial interest "if the shoe fits..." janet janet paterson - 51/41/37 - almonte/ontario/canada http://www.newcountry.nu/pd/members/janet/ [log in to unmask]