Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: sources of information

Posted by Dr. Bob on October 15, 2002, at 22:56:17

In reply to Re: sources of information » Dr. Bob, posted by Alan on October 14, 2002, at 20:20:35

> I did not mean that only doctors should be posting, but that when they do, such as your previous "guest" doctors, that they have full disclosure of their affiliations with commercial interests or with any commercial product.

Hmm, that's not such a bad idea. How much disclosure would you consider "full"? And would you settle for disclosures -- or require that they not have any affiliations?

> There are no rescources to contradict a pharmrep when they hold all of the cards and ask for scientific evidence to disprove them when they are contradicted. They are in positions of authority and the members of this bboard are by and large not able to contradict their claims on equivalent terms (for instance does any one of us have access to the tests Forest lab did including the ones they discarded in order to change the test parameters to be able to cherry-pick their results submitted to the FDA?).

If there aren't any resources to contradict him, why don't you necessarily believe him? And if you don't necessarily believe him, why would others?

> Firstly, anyone that claims to be a doc or in similar position of authority that dispenses medical advice (which is what pharmrep is actually doing) - that deliberately comes here putting themselves in a position of authority should have their credentials verified in some way shouldn't they?

If you assume people believe everything they hear, yes. Voluntary verification of credentials might be interesting. But exactly what credentials would I need to verify? And how would I verify them?

> (liscence no. for verification comes to mind)

But someone could just make up a license number. Or give me someone else's...

> Secondly perhaps start a board called something like "Professional Psycho-babble corner" or something of the sort where these verified MHP's that have received verification could take place before MHP's are allowed to speak from a position of authority.

Yes, but wasn't part of the idea also keeping them from posting on other boards? How would I do that? Especially since they might not say they're MHPs?

> It's the mixing of authority with inquisitive but vulnerable consumers that bother me on the main babble board. Having two seperate boards would at least identify things for what they really are rather than pretending what they aren't.

Sorry, are you saying I'm pretending that there's no mixing of professionals and consumers on PB?

Bob


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Dr. Bob thread:6905
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20020918/msgs/7696.html