|Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Must watch: top 10 non-MSM health stories of 2012|
Must watch: top 10 non-MSM health stories of 2012
Posted - 12/29/2012 11:22:06 AM | show profile | flag this post
Ignore the rhetoric, yes there is rhetoric there, and listen to the FACTS. The facts are frightening.
This is a must watch for anyone who has children. And anyone looking for information about the medical industry.
Best health advice? Never go to the doctor and never take any medications.
Posted - 12/29/2012 1:26:14 PM | show profile | flag this post
Don't ignore only the rhetoric; also ignore the guy being interviewed. He is not a medical expert; he runs a "citizen journalism" website that cherry-picks facts to support advocacy. I know this because someone on a local BBS here posts Natural News crapola all the time, and it's so easy to refute; Natural News can't even get it straight when it steals other reporters' information, let alone misquoting studies and policies.
The only qualification for the "citizen journalists" at Natural News is clear writing, not factual writing. They're paid via Google AdSense, which is dependent on how many page views they get -- the more outrageous the spin, the more hits, the more pay. It's not a business model that produces credible journalism.
Sites like this damage not only the profession, particularly legitimately trained journalists doing genuine fully researched and well-reported alternative journalism, but also damage viewers by feeding them junk. They're not trying to make you think, they're not giving you secrets that mainstream media dared not report -- they're feeding you selected details so you'll become outraged enough to swallow their garbage "information."
So many of these outfits are so cheap or so shoddy that they'll either go under of their own accord or they'll be seen as the frauds they are.
(And now if you want to hear what I *really* thought of the play ... )
Posted - 12/29/2012 1:41:35 PM | show profile | flag this post
Ha! I just Googled "Mike Adams." There's some choice stuff online exposing him. Or, basically, wasting time on him.
Posted - 12/29/2012 2:25:22 PM | show profile | flag this post
most of those kinds of sites will cease to exist..
the day barack obama leaves office..and not one day before..
almost all of them came into being around the time he became the front runner for the nomination to his first term..
li'll leave you to deduce why.. it's not hard to figure out..
Posted - 12/29/2012 5:35:00 PM | show profile | flag this post
This why I said look at the FACTS.
Merck and GlaxoSmithKiline were both sued this year.
And I dare you to try to find just ONE MSM story on the absolute failure of the Merck mumps vaccine, including the company's deliberately falsified data.
Yet it continued to promote and sell a vaccine that was not safe or efficacious -- and injected it into babies. But ignore the facts because you don't like the messenger. That's smart.
I don't trust any news source these days. The difference between the MSM and the "alternate" news sources is that sometimes the alternate news actually includes links to source data, where I can see the FACTS and make up my own mind.
Here's an excerpt from the courthouse news website:
Merck has known for a decade that its mumps vaccine is "far less effective" than it tells the government, and it falsified test results and sold millions of doses of "questionable efficacy," flooding and monopolizing the market, a primary caregiver claims in a federal antitrust class action.
Alabama-based Chatom Primary Care sued Merck on Monday, the week after the unsealing of a False Claims Act complaint two relators filed in 2010.
Those relators, Stephen Krahling and Joan Wlochowski, were Merck virologists who claim in their unsealed complaint that they "witnessed firsthand the improper testing and data falsification in which Merck engaged to artificially inflate the vaccine's efficacy findings."
Krahling and Wlochowski claimed Merck's scheme caused the United States to pay "hundreds of millions of dollars for a vaccine that does not provide adequate immunization."
But again, ignore the facts because you don't like the messenger. It doesn't make what he says any less untrue.
Posted - 12/29/2012 6:31:31 PM | show profile | flag this post
Perhaps you'd trust Dr. Oz?
Few facts about Dr. Oz.... What he says on his show and the reality of his personal choices for his family conflict.
He is a hypocrite.
1. see this video re his feelings on vaccines
Vaccines are apparently well and good for his audience but not one member of his family voluntarily gets them. His wife refuses to vaccinate his kids, and as an MD, he goes along with it??
2. His wife Lisa Oz NARRATES the film, "Genetic Roulette,: The Gamble of Our Lives" that exposes the risks associated with GMO foods (cancer, diabetes, immune disease, chronic pain, infertility, etc., good stuff, good stuff). His daughter Daphne, is a cast member of The Chew, and supports healthy eating and homeopathic detox habits.
Here are his comments on GMO foods/poll his show did on GMO foods:
"Now, when we took a poll online at DoctorOz.com, we found that overwhelming 91% of you would prefer purchasing NON-genetically modified food, if you were given the choice.
So, if you want to know if your food is genetically modified, I believe you should have that right.
Since I’m unaware of any sound data on long-term effects of genetically modified food in humans, that we learned today, I prefer to be cautious.”
Yet in an interview with Time magazine, he did a complete flip flip, claiming GMO foods are snobby and undemocratic, and that conventional foods are perfectly fine.
As if his wife would allow ANY nonorganic food in his house.
But he is a beloved MD on tv. So people believe him. Because they believe he wouldn't lie to them.
Facts. They don't lie.
And I beg each of you to watch the movie Genetic Roulette. It is frightening and will change your eating habits forever.
Posted - 12/29/2012 9:59:46 PM | show profile | flag this post
I don't have time to waste on chasing down your "challenges" to me and orth to justify your posts. If you're attracted to websites that lack credibility, that's your problem. You not going to make it my problem.
Posted - 12/29/2012 10:05:52 PM | show profile | flag this post
P.S. As I understand it, the claims made in "Genetic Roulette" lack substantiation.
Therefore, nobody needs to waste any time on it.
Posted - 12/29/2012 10:26:58 PM | show profile | flag this post
One more thing: If you were on my staff, I'd put you on a PIP so fast your head would spin. There is *no place* in journalism for a reporter or editor who holds up up advocates and celebrities as primary sources.
Posted - 12/29/2012 10:32:02 PM | show profile | flag this post
(Darn this site for not allowing revisions!)
One more thing: If you were on my staff, I'd put you on a PIP so fast your head would spin. There is *no place* in journalism for anyone who holds up up advocates and celebrities as primary sources of scientific information.