Evaluating our favorite web-sites - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 03:51 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Hi,

Amnesiac did a thread a little while back on how we all evaluate information. I posted a sort of meandering discussion of the way librarians do it. She suggested that it might be interesting to apply the librarian's standards to some of our favorite web-sites. I have summarized them into an easy to follow list, here:

1. Who stands behind the site? Is that information easy to find? Clearly stated?
2. How often is the site updated? Do articles and postings have dates?
3. Do links work? A lot of unusable links indicates a neglected or badly managed site.
4. Do individual articles have an author? Footnotes or endnotes? A bibliography? Info about original publication? Is it an excerpt from a book? Originally published in a journal? When and where? Is conflict of interest information for the author and for his/her sponsoring organization available?
5. Does the site carry advertising? Does it recommend particular products? Look for possible covert conflicts of interest (an example would be the CDC simultaneously monitoring the safety of vaccines and promoting their use).

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#2 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 04:05 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Just quickly, I did a nice site evaluation to start off this thread and then a phone call came in and I lost it! I'll try again later, sorry for the mess-up.
Nana
Deborah is online now  
#3 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 04:11 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah
Just quickly, I did a nice site evaluation to start off this thread and then a phone call came in and I lost it! I'll try again later, sorry for the mess-up.
Nana
Eagerly awaiting it.
mamakay is offline  
#4 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 04:17 PM
 
DesireeH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Good info to look for, thanks for posting this. I get most of my information from books but I also check the references and the same questions for evaluating websites are good to apply to book references as well.

Desiree

DesireeH is offline  
#5 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 04:33 PM
 
LongIsland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 11,712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wanted to get some clarification - I'm on the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) website constantly. Are we evaluting the site or the organization - or both?

For instance, with respect to confict of interest, almost 100% the AAP's corporate donors are pharmaceutical companies. Now I don't know if that applies to the funding to keep the website up and running, but it does apply to the organization itself.

Thanks!

ETA: I think it would be a good idea for people to put language such as: EVALUATION: [name of website or publication] in the title of the thread
LongIsland is offline  
#6 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 09:25 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Here is a site I'm quite fond of:
http://www.vaccinescience.org/index.html

I'll run through the analysis step by step:

1. The site has a clear statement of purpose and ownership: click on "about"
Quote:
VaccineScience.org is a watchdog group dedicated to protecting scientific integrity in vaccine research. We invite both full time scientists and others interested in scientific standards to contribute reviews and participate on this site. Vaccine research strongly influences both government policies and public health care standardss. It benefits us all for those knowledgeable about methodology and statistics to evaluate the scientific merit in these research papers.
VaccineScience also seeks to educate consumers on distinguishing valuable research from "junk science." Parents, especially, have a vested interest in learning to evaluate evidence for themselves, rather than simply rely on controversial claims made by both sides of the debate. We will be providing tutorials on basic scientific principles, and welcome feedback in order to make the tutorials as easy to understand as possible.

Lastly, VaccineScience is also a email discussion list hosted by Yahoogroups for those interested in news and debate on this topic. All participants are welcome, regardless of their position on the vaccine issue.

The site is solely and privately funded by the webmaster and editor, Helen Tucker. All participation is free, and no ads or donations are solicited.
2. Dates: All of the citations and reviews have dates. The site has not been updated lately. The "Newsmakers" on the home page are from 2004.

3. I didn't take the time to test all the links, but the random selection I tried all worked.

4. Reviews show an author. Quoted material is correctly cited, sometimes with links. It is easy to tell who said what, when, and where it was originally published. Reviews have notes, but no bibliography (however, reviews are usually not held to a scholarly standard, so this is not a huge problem).

5. No ads. No products being promoted.

Other comments: Includes pro-vaccine links along with anti-vaccine links. The reviews published on the site all criticize articles that support vaccinations.

Summary: A good site, but not current.

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#7 of 45 Old 06-12-2005, 09:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
I wanted to get some clarification - I'm on the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) website constantly. Are we evaluting the site or the organization - or both?
The idea is to evaluate the way in which the site presents the organization (or the individual, or the cause). To evaluate the organization you would need to go off of the site and do further research. That would be a different thread! Good project, though.

Quote:
For instance, with respect to confict of interest, almost 100% the AAP's corporate donors are pharmaceutical companies. Now I don't know if that applies to the funding to keep the website up and running, but it does apply to the organization itself.
It is unusual for an organization to have a special funding pool just for their web-site, but for a major non-profit association, the web-site should have extensive information on their funding sources, or tell you where to find it.

Quote:
ETA: I think it would be a good idea for people to put language such as: EVALUATION: [name of website or publication] in the title of the thread
Great idea. I'll go back to my first "site" post and put the name in the title space.

Thanks for some really constructive questions and suggestions.
Nana
Deborah is online now  
#8 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 12:30 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I really enjoyed your ideas, Deborah & I think I'll go bump up the other thread to go along with this one because you had some other tips in there too!
amnesiac is offline  
#9 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 02:27 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amnesiac
I really enjoyed your ideas, Deborah & I think I'll go bump up the other thread to go along with this one because you had some other tips in there too!
Yes, I wanted to distill it down to a few essential points in the hopes that people would pop up a few web sites and look at where they are coming from.

I'll just grab another one at random and see what I see

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#10 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 02:48 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
http://www.know-vaccines.org/controversy.html

1. Who stands behind the site? A little hard to figure out. If you go to the tab that says "Know about us" you find their Mission, Goals and Services. At the bottom the copyright: © Copyright 2001 Vaccine Awareness of North Florida, Inc. tells you the name of the organization, but that is all.

So-so on "who" [I just found a description of the organization: it is on the contact page.] They just went up a couple of notches, but this information should be easy and obvious.

2. Dates, etc. Only dates are copyright dates at the bottom of some pages. It is impossible to tell if information has been updated recently. This is a particular problem because they have info on Florida statutes and exemptions. Out of date info could cause real problems.

3. Links, etc. I tried seven out of twelve links on their "KNOW Resource Links" tab. One failed, one gave a new address.

4. Quality of articles. No authors shown for any content. No footnotes for any article that I checked. There is a list of recommended reading, here:
http://www.know-vaccines.org/reading.html

5. No advertising, nothing being sold, so no obvious conflicts of interest.

Overall take. The site could be improved a lot by adding dates, adding authors for articles and/or citing sources for information mentioned. Running link checking software on a regular basis would also be a good idea. And telling who they are on the "Know about us" tab is essential.

This is not a site that a librarian would recommend. All of the information, including the state specific info is available on other, better organized sites.
Sorry

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#11 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 02:50 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
So, hey, somebody else want to have a try? Who wants to tackle one of the Pro Vax sites? CDC? Pediatricians? Immunize and be happy (probably doesn't exist, but it should)? Does Paul Offitt have a site?

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#12 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 03:31 PM
 
LongIsland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 11,712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Specifically the Immunization Information portion of the site

www.aap.org

1. Who stands behind the site?

The AAP, an organization of 60,000 pediatricians.
© COPYRIGHT AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
American Academy of Pediatrics, 141 Northwest Point Blvd., Elk Grove Village, IL, 60007, 847-434-4000


2. Dates, etc.: I find that all immunization information is up-to-date and mirrors information contained on the CDC's official website. I went on the site today and it indicated that is was "modified" on June 6, 2005. When information is new, a flashing yellow icon with the words "NEW" appears next to the information on the "Immunization Information" homepage.

3. Links, etc.: There is a disclaimer: *Links, organizations, information and resources contained within this site do not constitute an endorsement by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The AAP is not responsible for the content of these resources.

There is a link of web resources for parents; however, each organization is pro-immunization. VAERS is actually listed though.

There is a link for journals and periodicals such as:
Pediatrics
AAP News
AAP Grand Rounds
NeoReviews
Pediatrics in Review

4. Quality of articles. Authors and footnotes are shown on articles. Articles I have come across are from respected, peer reviewed journals.

5. There is no advertising. Products sold on the site:

Pediatric Infectious Disease Care Pak
Red Book®, 26th Edition, Softcover and Multimedia Set
Visual Red Book on CD-ROM, 2003 Edition
Red Book 2003, Hardcover
Red Book® for PDA 2003 Edition
Managing Infectious Diseases in Child Care and Schools

Potential conflicts: The organization itself receives a considerable amount of money, the overwhelming majority from the pharmaceutical industry.

Overall take: I think the site format is superior and easy to navigate. The search function is very helpful. Type in anything - and you will find a link to one of the journals or periodicals. I use this site quite a bit.
LongIsland is offline  
#13 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 03:57 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Thanks Long Island! Nice job.

One question: is the funding information available on the site or did you track it down elsewhere? Organizations should tell you where they get their support, when they tell you who they are, or at least point to where you can find it.

For example the Florida organization didn't explain their sources of support, but it is pretty clear they are a parent run organization and it would be easy enough to call or e-mail and ask how they are funded. The contact info is on the site. So how about the AAP?

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#14 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:01 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Found this:
Quote:
Build a Relationship

Corporate members have access to leaders in pediatrics and can play a role in developing and refining programs that support the Academy’s mission to ensure the health and well being of children. Member activities enable you to develop and strengthen relationships with Academy leadership and network with AAP representatives.
http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfmembroc.htm

I don't know about the rest of you, but that statement totally creeps me out.
Nana
Deborah is online now  
#15 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:08 PM
 
LongIsland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 11,712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfhonorroll.htm

The big spenders receive the honor of having their logo's splashed on the page. The other pharma's are listed in black underneath.

You'll notice that McDonald's and PepsiCo donate as well . . . two other companies that like to poison children.
LongIsland is offline  
#16 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:10 PM
 
ERSsmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just wanted to say thank you. This is a great idea. As a resident of Florida I have been to the K.N.O.W site several times for the statutes. And my take of the website was pretty much as you described. While I use the site, I have always felt the need to double check the info, but I couldn't quite expain what didn't sit well with me. You summed it up perfectly. I now use the actual Florida statutes website to get my info. I wonder if it would be helpful if we contacted the owners of the site to tell them your critique. Perhaps they could make some changes that would give us a little more confidence in them?
ERSsmom is offline  
#17 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:16 PM
 
LongIsland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 11,712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
see previous post by me.
LongIsland is offline  
#18 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:21 PM
 
ERSsmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfhonorroll.htm
You'll notice that McDonald's and PepsiCo donate as well . . . two other companies that like to poison children.
I guess to them money is money, but you would think that ethically they would not take money from companies that have such unhealthy products and specifically target children in their advertising. Well, at least I would hope...[sigh].
ERSsmom is offline  
#19 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:50 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERSsmom
I just wanted to say thank you. This is a great idea. As a resident of Florida I have been to the K.N.O.W site several times for the statutes. And my take of the website was pretty much as you described. While I use the site, I have always felt the need to double check the info, but I couldn't quite expain what didn't sit well with me. You summed it up perfectly. I now use the actual Florida statutes website to get my info. I wonder if it would be helpful if we contacted the owners of the site to tell them your critique. Perhaps they could make some changes that would give us a little more confidence in them?
Feel free to share my review with them. You can mention that I just picked them out of a Google search with no intention of giving anyone in particular a hard time

If anyone reading this has a web-site that they would like to have reviewed, just post it and I'll go have a look. Free professional librarian service!

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#20 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 04:51 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfhonorroll.htm

The big spenders receive the honor of having their logo's splashed on the page. The other pharma's are listed in black underneath.

You'll notice that McDonald's and PepsiCo donate as well . . . two other companies that like to poison children.
Oh my G_d!

Road to h*ll paved with good intentions! I suppose somewhere along the line they meant well.

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#21 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 05:04 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
http://www.aap.org/donate/fcfhonorroll.htm

The big spenders receive the honor of having their logo's splashed on the page. The other pharma's are listed in black underneath.

You'll notice that McDonald's and PepsiCo donate as well . . . two other companies that like to poison children.
Sorry...I'm feeling kind of slow today.
Can one of you spell out exactly how this relationship might effect their research and conclutions about children's health?
I mean, I can see that it's a company(or companies) with products sponsoring the people and organization that attest to the saftey of those products, but I'm a little confused as to exactly *how* that works, kwim?
mamakay is offline  
#22 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 05:33 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay
Sorry...I'm feeling kind of slow today.
Can one of you spell out exactly how this relationship might effect their research and conclutions about children's health?
I mean, I can see that it's a company(or companies) with products sponsoring the people and organization that attest to the saftey of those products, but I'm a little confused as to exactly *how* that works, kwim?
Go back and look at my post #14. They say that corporate sponsors get special access.

Now, it is always possible that an organization can take money and not have their policies or thinking influenced in any way, shape or form, but it is tricky. This is why foundation money is better, because foundations are designed to be a step away from corporate management. The process of applying for grants also blocks some of the obvious forms of influence (and opens up others, admittedly).

I guess the question comes down to who is in charge, who is pulling the strings, who is setting policy.

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#23 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 05:37 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
To get more concrete how this stuff works:

Suppose a consumer organization is making a fuss about children eating huge amounts of sugar. They talk about obesity, diabetes, constipation, behavior problems, etc. They try to get the AAP to sign on to their campaign. AAP looks at their corporate sponsored research and says: sugar in moderate amounts is quite okay and what are you all fussing about? Or, even worse, they have a chat with McDonalds and Pepsico and are told: "Hey, we need some research to support the health and safety of the normal american diet eaten by typical children. Can you find us some nice scientists? We'll pay."

Stuff like this happens.

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#24 of 45 Old 06-13-2005, 05:44 PM
 
ERSsmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah
Feel free to share my review with them. You can mention that I just picked them out of a Google search with no intention of giving anyone in particular a hard time
Nana
Great thanks. I will be sure to not offend anyone or make them think we were picking on them. Perhaps I will say something along the lines of "as someone who values your website and your cause, may I make a few suggestions" or something along those lines.
ERSsmom is offline  
#25 of 45 Old 06-14-2005, 09:02 AM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
I wanted to add, on the plus side for AAP, they do not make any attempt to conceal their sources of income. The extreme openness of their statements is a positive in my opinion.

Haven't looked at the CDC site yet, but I suspect it would take considerable research on their site and elsewhere to spot the industry influence and the conflicts of interest.

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#26 of 45 Old 06-14-2005, 10:46 AM
 
ERSsmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not to mention the fact that I find their site hard to navigate. It is really easy to find their pamphlets that they give to parents, but more...shall I say scientific information is hard to find. It could just be me though, I am not really internet savvy .
ERSsmom is offline  
#27 of 45 Old 06-14-2005, 08:27 PM
 
Momtezuma Tuatara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,091
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
See this is a sticky one.

If you analysed the IAS.org.nz website you'd give it a crappy rating.

But the point is the IAS doesn't have the time, money, people or resources to do more than a skeleton attempt at a website. Sometimes I think no website would be better. But its the best that can be done under the circumstances.

A lot of websites look fantastic. They are well organised, have lots of money flung at them, are well run, kept updated, but are a load of corporate bollocks, and designed to push personal wheelbarrows.

But you don't know that, if you don't know what some of the pitfalls in the basic information is. As per some of the stuff I put on Am's thread.

“I want to sell drugs to everyone. I want to sell drugs to healthy people. I want drugs to sell like chewing gum.” former Merck CEO, Henry Gadsden

Momtezuma Tuatara is offline  
#28 of 45 Old 06-15-2005, 12:04 AM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momtezuma Tuatara
See this is a sticky one.

If you analysed the IAS.org.nz website you'd give it a crappy rating.

But the point is the IAS doesn't have the time, money, people or resources to do more than a skeleton attempt at a website. Sometimes I think no website would be better. But its the best that can be done under the circumstances.

A lot of websites look fantastic. They are well organised, have lots of money flung at them, are well run, kept updated, but are a load of corporate bollocks, and designed to push personal wheelbarrows.

But you don't know that, if you don't know what some of the pitfalls in the basic information is. As per some of the stuff I put on Am's thread.
Good point Momtezuma Tuatara. On the other hand, even a financially strapped organization can manage to tell who they and where they get their financial support. Putting dates on items is also not a high tech activity.

When librarians analyze information, especially medical information, they are well aware of the sad fact that those with the big bucks are not those with the best intentions. I don't think many librarians would actually be impressed by the AAP as a source: the corporate input is just way too obvious. On the other hand, I did see an article once by a librarian who thought that Quackwatch was just great. She saw that he was supposedly a doctor and that he said that he wasn't taking any corporate money and went ooh la la! Sad.

Anyway, aren't you the one who recommended that people find original medical research to quote, rather than depending on books and web-sites with secondary material?

Not trying to pick a fight. I know when I'm outclassed... :

Nana
Deborah is online now  
#29 of 45 Old 06-15-2005, 01:14 AM
 
Momtezuma Tuatara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,091
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah
Anyway, aren't you the one who recommended that people find original medical research to quote, rather than depending on books and web-sites with secondary material?

Not trying to pick a fight. I know when I'm outclassed... :

Nana
Yes, I am. Therefore you could say its hypocritical to have written a book.

I rarely go to websites, or read books. But here, we are talking about the principals of analysis, and in this regard, something else I said here some time back, about Condalisa Rice, is relevant.

There was a big article about her recently in this country, and they considered that what she said had "more credibility" because she was a savvy "power" dresser with every hair in place. So. Satan, in the Bible is depicted as an Angel of Light and the Father of Lies.

And we all know from school projects, that "presentation is half the battle". Condalisa Rice can shut people's brain down, because they see clean lines, cultured language, and therefore think she must know what she's talking about.

However, I'm mindful that the medical profession is doing surveys on this very topic. And the last three articles they have published on the issue show me one thing.

The only reason they want to know how we analyse information, the reasoning behind our choices etc, is not to respect our choices, or understand us better, but to counter us.

If this forum was a protected forum, I would be prepared to talk more. Given that we are watched and read, I'd rather not make their job of keeping tabs on us, or understanding what we think any easier...

“I want to sell drugs to everyone. I want to sell drugs to healthy people. I want drugs to sell like chewing gum.” former Merck CEO, Henry Gadsden

Momtezuma Tuatara is offline  
#30 of 45 Old 06-15-2005, 01:36 AM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Geez...you're really freaking me out, Momtezuma.
mamakay is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off