| Poster | Thread |
Lysa
Member
Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3699
East TN for now!
| | Re: reformer | | Quote:
reformer wrote:
Don't know about you but if someone is sued multiple times for malpractice and false advertising...I won't go!.... (removed some)
Many people are sue happy these days and I believe you will be able to determine whether it is greed or unprofessional conduct.
That's why I was trying to get references out of Chris about these suits against Mercola.
My reasoning especially with alternative medicine... how many of these so-called suits have been won? If none, then I don't want to hear any more about how many times he's been allegedly sued.
8-)
_________________
Lisa
|
|
 2009/10/30 12:11 | Profile |
Lysa
Member
Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3699
East TN for now!
| | Re: appolus | | Quote:
appolus wrote:
.... If lawsuits were the measure or standard by which we judged, then none of us would step into Doctors offices or drug stores......Frank
Amen Frank!!
_________________
Lisa
|
|
| 2009/10/30 12:12 | Profile |
| | Re: | | "And yes I think it is a good measure to judge a place or practice. Have you ever went to a place that has a bad reputation or poor reviews? I try to avoid places that have poor ratings."
I agree with that particular point. I guess the larger point was that most drug companies have been sued multiple times, been involved in cover-ups and have been shown to slant research to their favor. And also Chinese companies have not always , to say the least, been ethical when it comes to their manufacturing procedures, and I belive that it is a Chineses company that is one of the five manufacturers. I guess the easiest solution, at least in regard to vaccinations and so on, is to seek the Lord and go as your led........Frank
|
|
| 2009/10/30 12:14 | |
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi Lysa...
Quote:
Now, where are you sources for these claims.
What are his "substantial AND specific claims that are NOT verified by research"?
"According to law, this is medical malpractice."
Where is this law? What does it state exactly?
I ask this because my next post is some things that Dr. Oz has stated and no one is suing him.
"He has been sued many times because of false advertising."
Where are the sources for the suits AND where these people won their cases? That quack doctor sued him but he dropped his case. Where are ALL THESE MANY TIMES that he has been sued and lost?
I actually looked at the dockets from several of those cases. I will try to remember from which legal website I viewed those (but they are public record). I also saw some articles from several medical journals ABOUT the man's claims (as well as in national media sources that reported on those lawsuits). The lawsuits weren't merely typical personal injury lawsuits...but lawsuits from the FDA against Mercola for making fraudulent claims. In each of those cases that I viewed, Mercola ultimately complied with the FDA's rulings. I will dig these up and provide them to you (if you still want), but you could also look them up too. I will probably just add those citations to the bottom of this post and let you know via PM.
*EDIT - Just for clarity, these cases from the FDA were about specific claims that he was making in regard to some of the "cure" products that he was selling in his website and catalogs. They did not prevent him from continuing to sell some of those products (which are not necessarily dangerous unless they are taken under false pretenses). Dr. Mercola continues to sell some of those products, but his claims have changed. He also continues to recommend acupuncture and diagnoses via invisible "energy fields."
However, I am less concerned about the previous verdicts against this man and his alternative medicine company than I am for some of his CURRENT statements. He is making specific claims (especially in regard to the swine flu vaccination) that just aren't verified by any peer reviewed research. I've looked through his claims and there just is no evidence to substantiate what he says. Since he is the one making the claims (claims that, by the way, criticize and contradict the research of just about every other major medical study in regard to the swine flu), then the burden of proof should rest within his own claims.
The thing that I find ironic is that many of the individuals and websites that are against the swine flu vaccination continue to point to Dr. Mercola's website as a "source." Oddly, the "source" himself has no proof to validate his own statements. He is highly critical about the vast amount of medical research presented, but then sometimes cites ("pick-and-chooses") the bits and pieces that he thinks will give credibility to his statements. There doesn't seem to be a disclaimer or admission that the vast majority of medical research does not support his claims. Instead, he implies in some of the comment sections in his website that medical researcher themselves are largely influenced by money from the pharmaceutical companies.
Now, I don't have a problem that Dr. Mercola has a for-profit business that makes money off of his own recommendations for his own alternative medicine products (in answer appolus's reply). This is, after all, still a "free market" economy. However, he is highly critical of pharmaceutical companies for making profits...when he himself is doing the same thing. The difference, however, is that Dr. Mercola's advice sometimes goes against the vast majority of credible, peer-reviewed medical research. In this case, Mercola is critical of the swine flu vaccine and questions its validity or possible danger...but cannot provide a single piece of peer-reviewed medical research to validate his claim. He then turns around and markets and sells his own alternative.
I have no problem with using alternative medicines or treatments -- especially if they are simply a different method to treat an illness that have been validated by research. With every medical procedure or treatment, people should conduct their own review of all research available. However, the alternative medicine companies should at least acknowledge "alternatives" to the alternative medicine -- especially in regard to the conclusions of the vast majority of medical research.
Now, I know that this thread is not about Joseph Mercola or his alternative medicine business. However, several people have quoted this guy (even in this and the other swine flu vaccine thread). When I looked through many of the anti-swine flu vaccination websites, it was interesting that many of them actually pointed to this same person. There were even "citations" provided in either this or the other swine flu thread that linked to Dr. Mercola's claims. The only reason that I have continued to bring up Mercola is to question the validity of his claims when he has no peer-reviewed evidence to validate his "concerns" (as he sells an alternative product), and to also point out that a vast amount of medical research addresses those "concerns" and find them without medical merit.
I hope that this makes sense. A small group of mostly-alternative medicine individuals (like Dr. Joseph Mercola) have made claims about influenza vaccinations (and, currently, the various swine influenza vaccinations), but the vast majority of in-depth medical research says that those claims hold no merit.
_________________
Christopher
|
|
| 2009/10/30 12:26 | Profile |
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi Lysa...
Quote:
That's why I was trying to get references out of Chris about these suits against Mercola.
My reasoning especially with alternative medicine... how many of these so-called suits have been won? If none, then I don't want to hear any more about how many times he's been allegedly sued.
That is fine...but don't you have a problem when a man makes specific medical claims that are not validated by medical research...and then markets and sells his own product for the same illness?
All of the personal injury lawsuits that have been won against pharmaceutical companies have come as a result of the findings of peer-reviewed research. In most of the cases involving of Dr. Mercola, he has none. He carefully words the products that he sells in order to avoid making specific claims (but getting as close as he possibly can without crossing that line). The cases that I read from the FDA all involved him crossing that line.
A person can sell Vitamin C -- but it is medical malpractice to sell it as a cure for diabetes or cancer. This would be akin to the "snake oil cure-all" salesmen from a hundred years ago. Most of Dr. Mercola's products are just natural herbs or procedures (although I am not talking about his promotion of acupuncture or his "Emotional Freedom Techniques" that include diagnoses by viewing invisible "energy fields"). His herbal remedies are just that -- herbal remedies. They are meant as an alternative "treatment" and are often based upon personal opinion rather than medical research. However, the FDA steps in when a specific medical claim is made that is completely unsubstantiated by any research whatsoever. This is what has occurred several times the claims for some of Mercola's business products.
_________________
Christopher
|
|
| 2009/10/30 12:38 | Profile |
HeartSong
Member
Joined: 2006/9/13
Posts: 3179
| | Re: | | Quote:
I agree with you that we should always seek the Lord in every situation first through prayer. Then we must seek to walk out what He has for each of us in this time and situation.
Dear MaryJane,
We are not to "walk out," we are to "walk in."
God bless you sister. |
|
| 2009/10/30 13:32 | Profile |
HeartSong
Member
Joined: 2006/9/13
Posts: 3179
| | Re: | | Quote:
He also continues to recommend acupuncture and diagnoses via invisible "energy fields."
Dear Chris,
Surely you are not trying to say that something does not exist just because it is invisible? |
|
| 2009/10/30 13:47 | Profile |
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi HeartSong...
Quote:
Surely you are not trying to say that something does not exist just because it is invisible?
This is not in regard to [i]spiritual[/i] things, sister.
:-)
_________________
Christopher
|
|
| 2009/10/30 14:05 | Profile |
HeartSong
Member
Joined: 2006/9/13
Posts: 3179
| | Re: | | Quote:
ccchhhrrriiisss wrote:
Hi HeartSong...
Quote:
Surely you are not trying to say that something does not exist just because it is invisible?
This is not in regard to [i]spiritual[/i] things, sister.
:-)
It most certainly is. |
|
| 2009/10/30 14:07 | Profile |
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi HeartSong...
So, you think that alternative medical practitioners can diagnose [u]physical[/u] illnesses by looking at the colors of invisible energy fields? And you think that this is a [u]spiritual[/u] work?
_________________
Christopher
|
|
| 2009/10/30 14:18 | Profile |
