HEALTH QUIZ: Do you feel that differing viewpoints are welcome in Health Forum?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Have you found that your threads are spammed with flame war type comments?

Did you want to participate in the Health Forum but felt harassed?

Do you feel that using the "ignore" function helps to block out stalkers?

Please recommend this thread if you are concerned about this issue.

Thank you.

[Deja Q]

1. If you want real discussion, then say 'yes'.

If mob mentality and empty one-liners are more stimulating, there is that other option.

I don't go in there often, but like most of the others, there's no doubt there's a flame war faction, a mob faction, clique corner, et cetera.


(On edit: I might have misread your OP...)

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

9. I don't think you misread the OP

thanks for commenting.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

3. Boy oh boy...

You are definitely the passive/aggressive type.

You just keep shoveling the shit while ignoring the tough questions and hope that some of it sticks...

[xchrom]

4. IF they are based on medical SCIENCE --

and not wish craft.

[varkam]

5. go democrats

[SidDithers]

6. Go Democrats!!!...nt

Sid

[varkam]

7. It's pretty funny...

that this is coming from someone who paints anyone with a different opinion as a freeper.

[SidDithers]

10. Yup. Pot, kettle, and all that...

:hi:

Sid

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

8. quite a few people don't feel that "differing viewpoints are welcome in this forum."

not a surprise.

[LeftishBrit]

11. I responded that I do not feel that different viewpoints are welcome in the forum

Of course some people are interested in real discussion and debate; but there are always people who assume an evil agenda, and accuse supporters of vaccines/ other aspects of Western medicine of being at best the dupes of government propaganda and at worst mercenary 'Big Pharma' shills.

I doubt that's what the OP meant, but that's my perception. It really puts me off posting at times.

[HamdenRice]

12. Different viewpoints are welcome by most. But there are self appointed dungeon masters here ...

who excoriate anything that conflicts with their narrow, fundamentalist, "all pharma/health corporations are good all the time" dogma.

Because they are loud, dogmatic and tenacious, and because they "rally the troops" in the unskeptical Skeptics Group (despite that behavior being against DU rules) they appear to be a larger group than they actually are.

[LeftishBrit]

15. 'Loud, dogmatic and tenacious'?

How about such comments as the following - from a variety of people in different threads during the last few months:

' Your irrational exhuberence for de-regulation of Pharma is beyond the pale. amazing your unquestioning support of any and all medicines regardless,
and your blind trust in Pharma to police itself.’

’However, thanks to your infamously perfected skill of f*cking our children up, our numbers are growing exponentially. Your house of cards built on lies will fall soon, just like Big Tobacco.’

‘You mercury-pushers talk a tough game, but when it comes to actually doing the necessary common sense research to prove your no ASD/vaccine link, you wilt like pansies in the desert. "9/11, worthless studies, 9/11, impossible, 9/11, can't do it, 9/11, can't find enough unvaccinated kids, 9/11, unethical..." Nothing but excuses from cowards. ‘

‘the pharma giants have put out so much disinformation and weaseled out of any responsibility for what they have wrought-because they don't want to pay the billions of dollars in claims they are responsible for.
May those bastards and their supporters on this thread ROT IN HELL!!! ’’

'There seem to be a lot of close-minded people on here.
Why are they here? There are plenty of places to go for close-minded people who want to echo the pharmaceutical line.'

'I'm sure the pharmaceuticals rest easy knowing you're here to protect their interests.'

'That incorrect guess of mine where I assumed you were in the pharm industry really got to you. Could it be that you may feel unconsciously GUILTY about prescribing drugs but this is all you know because of your training? If so, realize that you can become a holistic MD. You can learn acupuncture, nutrition, etc., and with your extensive medical training, you will be very well-rounded’


Do you think any of these posts are expressing tolerance for other viewpoints?

[uppityperson]

24. False dichotomy and fundies are at both ends of the spectrum.

There are choices between "all natural is all good Big Pharma is murdering us all for money" vs "all pharma/health corporations are good all the time".

And there is dogma from both those extremes and too many times negative words get thrown at each other with insults that someone MUST believe one or the other.

I didn't know there was a Skeptics Group, thanks for letting me know, I need to check them out.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

36. Actually, some folks are being mis-labeled to try to discredit them

When I post criticism of Big Pharma - I've been labeled and called names, and been the recipient of "zingers" (thats what I guess I will call them). There has been a clique that joins together to
spam my threads with insults and one liners.

When I criticized a new vaccine that was "fast tracked" and for which $millions were spent
trying to influence lawmakers to mandate it - I was labled as an "anti-vaxxer", and also some idiots wrongly put words in my mouth to accuse me of thinking the vaccine would increase promiscuity.

I don't trust big Pharma, and when they try to rush something out to the market, where there is no emergency, and especially with the Bush Deadenders running things, I don't trust their products.

We have too many conflicts of interests in our current system to just trust every drug or vaccine that rushes out into the market. Better to wait and see what the new drug/vaccine does before jumping on the bandwagon.

There is a gang here who believes that its ok for them hound people until those people get disgusted and leave DU or leave the DU Health Forum. And if an OP is critical of big pharma, or the "one size fits all" vaccine strategy, then they will attack.

The fact is that I do not oppose vaccines.

I want want better vaccine safety, and believe we need to research vaccines more carefully. We need studies that compare vaccinated groups to non vaccinated groups.

I believe that Big Pharma needs to be regulated by someone that does not receive money from them nor has any financial interest in Big Pharma or other groups.

I believe we should be critical of Big Pharma when they lie, cheat, mislead or cause deaths of thousands while they bank huge profits.

Further, I get suspcious when any vaccine being fast tracked for young children when there is no epidemic, and when the maker was forced to pay $4.5 Billion to those injured by its "fast tracked" drug that was not a life saving drug and not an emergency drug. This company who knowingly caused the deaths of thousands of people (because they knew their drug caused heart attacks), needed a new vaccine to make up the billions of $ to pay for the settlement. So I am skeptical of their new vaccine, and I am not alone. I want more study before this vaccine is given to other children.
Haven't we yet learned that Merck et al will do anything to make a buck?

We saw the effect of lobbying dollars to get some lawmakers to try to mandate a vaccine. Amazingly, the vaccine is so expensive that it would wipe out most states' budget allocations needed for the essential vaccines for diseases easily communicated in schools and the general public.

IMHO, Fast tracking should be done for drugs that are needed to save lives, where there is not much
hope and where the risk is outweighed by the greater risk of inadequate treatments.

I don't believe my opinion is law or infallible, but I am repulsed, sickened and disgusted by the harassment I receive for for posting OPs that came from the Huffington Post, The New York Times and elsewhere.

The vigor of the attacks (on most of my threads, half of the comments are by the "gang" and are mostly one liners and personal attacks.

When I see this type of attack, it tells me that I am on to something, and to keep on going, keep on posting articles, keep on looking for articles, and to keep on sharing them especially in forums like this.

As long as the nastiness continues, I'll just keep the "clique" on ignore and will keep posting OPs in this forum.

The nastier they get, the more determined I become.

[Why Syzygy]

39. WYVBC ..

Is there a reason why you've chosen "Health" to post reports on Big Pharma rather than the "Drug Policy" forum?

[uppityperson]

43. Quick scan reads to me like Drug Policy is mostly illegal drug policy

Looks like a lot less traffic there also.

[Why Syzygy]

45. Where do I find Quick scan?

I thought I saw some posts related to Rx, but just cruised through. I should put that forum in my lists, though.

[uppityperson]

48. Guess I missed a few words there. A quick scan shows me that...

I didn't know that forum was here.

[Why Syzygy]

49. lol! .

:rofl: I've been hanging out in the computer group.

I didn't either. aaarrggh . Why is this so damn hard.

There should be a "quick scan" to give a brief statement of purpose for all those different forums.
I wonder if someone should ask someone...

I'm so glad ya'll are interested in pursuing a solution so it might be possible to clean up the toxic waste in here and open up the Health forum to promote progressive ideals. I don't want anyone to go unheard... by someone. At the DU, we all have many venues for that to happen.

[Why Syzygy]

13. "welcome" is such a subjective word

I don't care if my viewpoints are "welcomed".

One would hope discussions could at least be free of tactics strikingly similar to the narrow minded, bigoted and selfish Republicant's oppose and smash every concept that doesn't jibe with my world view methods.

The results of such stratagem should be evident to all.
Ruin and decay are two by-products.
Poverty and personal bankruptcy pile on.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

31. I used the word "welcome"

in lieu of finding a better word.

The thing is, this forum is a hostile environment -

If you post a view that certain people here don't like, its guaranteed thatthey will turn the thread into a flame war.

I just put them on ignore, something I've never done to anyone in the years I've been posting here.
Its nice.

I don't mind people who disagree with me, I'll see those posts, but people who
are nasty and vindictive - I won't be seeing their posts any more.

[Why Syzygy]

40. We agree that it is toxic.

It's what to do about it that's on my mind. There are RL people at DU working on HR 676 (Universal, Single Payer Health Care) at this very moment. Does anyone want to hear from them? I know there are many folks at DU who are interested in this topic, and all the out branches. But, they are (rightfully) not willing to tread into toxic waste. No one sent me. I don't even know if anything can be done. I just hate the waste of resources the current efforts represent.

There's a cost/benefit ratio to every decision the new administration makes in regard to past activities. I feel maybe this forum should be at a similar crossroad. How much is it (the feud/being right/ownership of toxic waste site) WORTH? How much does it (ditto) COST?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

44. your post is an example of what this forum could be used for - positive effect

thats is what we did in the Election Reform Forum.

We didn't all get along perfectly, but we ended up getting laws passed in
many states.

Im with you - this forum is so toxic that many people will post health
OPs in the General Discussion forum.

I have cross posted someone's GD piece about Diabetes over here, and it
got the usual flames and attacks.

In the GD, this person's OP ended up being being featured on the home page with the best OPs.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

46. then again welcome is a good one, because I've been "unwelcomed" to post here by a group of regulars

I've been told to take my posts to alternative forums, as if news that affects our
health has no business in this forum.

Ive been told to take my "anti vax" opinions to other forums.

The fact is, I am not Anti Vax.

The clique in this forum that wants to run me off has labeled me that because I am
critical of some vaccines that have been fast tracked when there is no fire, no emergency that
IMHO warrents the rush.

Its clear that the click will flame anyone who publicizes anything that puts Big Pharma in
a negative light.

The strategy is belittle and falsely label people such as myself as "anti vax".
They work hard to disrupt ANY thread I start.

I post articles from the New York Times and also Huffington Post.
So those who want to ridicule me have also ridiculed several US senators, Robert F Kennedy Jr,
and have said that Barack Obama was disengenuous when promising to push for studies on vaccine safety.

When the scientists at the FDA BEG the new President to investigate the FDA, that
ISN'T ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE.

WHEN BUSH DEADENDERS BLOCK FUNDING FOR VACCINE SAFETY RESEARCH, THAT ISN'T ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE.

This isn't alternative medicine.

This is about Big Pharma abusing its privilege to sell us medicines that are supposed to help heal us.

This is about fast tracking questionable drugs or vaccines at the risk of the public health.

This is about the corruption that has controlled the FDA for 8 years now, where the testing and approval of drugs is laden with conflicts of interest.

This is about HEALTH.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

47. PS, the "regulars" who've unwelcomed me:

are on "ignore" so I don't have to wade in their toxic filth any more.

[Why Syzygy]

50. I had to put someone on ignore yesterday

from a completely separate incident. I don't believe in censorship, but sometimes it's the only option left, short of quitting the place. I sure am glad I did though because I can see by the replies, the *Ignored* causes problems for others as well. And my reading experience is way more pleasant. DU has provided those tools for a purpose. Even in my most frequented/favorite forum, I sometimes hide threads because they just don't interest me, and I don't want to have to keep skipping them. I LOVE the Mark feature. I don't know how anyone keeps up without it.

However, since this has become an enclosed, positively poisonous environment for anyone who doesn't want to ignore a bunch of folks, there has to be another strategy.

Are you opposed to posting Rx threads in a different forum? I really feel that Rx, and regulations should have a different designation than "Health". There is so much more to health than Rx/vax. Is it true, though, that you have a special calling to advance that issue? Is it a pet? Wouldn't you feel better about it if it was presented to a receptive audience? Does anyone here support you?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

52. I won't be shoved to the back of the bus

I will post breaking news in the "health forum" as I see it.

I have posted articles here that have been featured by the NY Times or HuffPo,
as well as articles seen in Health Sections of online and paper media.

If its about health, it can be posted here.

I don't know which article I will post tomorrow.

I'm not going to the back of the bus.

IN FACT, I'M GOING TO DRINK OUT OF THE SAME WATER FOUNTAIN AS THE REST
OF THESE FOLKS IN THE HEALTH FORUM.

[Why Syzygy]

53. Obviously if it's about health ...

I would never shove anyone anywhere. I'm a push back kind of person too, though.
But, if someone gave me a luxury liner, I would ride that instead. Not saying that's the case here because I'm still in discovery mode. I can just quit talking right now if I choose because there are more than enough other things I could be reading, etc. When I came in yesterday morning, it was the same old turf war, ad tedium itis.

Will you answer the rest of my questions?
Is it true, though, that you have a special calling to advance that issue? Is it a pet? Wouldn't you feel better about it if it was presented to a receptive audience? Does anyone here support you?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

54. The flame throwers in this forum are a minority - more people feel unwelcome here than feel welcome

There would be much greater participation in this forum if "the clique" didn't
flame and attack them.

There are lots of people who are interested in health issues and who have something to say.

The clique could either stop harassing folks who have different views or
they could ignore those.

Or they could learn how to discuss without flaming, insulting, or harassing.

But that isn't going to happen, so I will continue to post Health news and Opinion
here and continue to keep "the clique" on "ignore".

There are people here who disagree without personal attack and insult, and I do not have
them on ignore.

Its the toxic clique that I find to be a total waste of my time and who are on "ignore".

If I have a quest, it is to keep on coming here until it is possible for people besides "the clique" to post comments and articles here in the health forum.

The ultimate goal should be to have a forum that provides rich and new content that educates and informs, that draws readers to DU, that provides a safe place to share ideas or concerns, or that provokes thought

This forum should be big enough for more than just a handful of folks to post here.

[Why Syzygy]

55. Well, there's the impasse.

Please do not take anything I write for you to be an attack on you. I am direct in my dealings with others. I get the same sometimes, sometimes not. I really don't have an opinion on who might be *right* or *wrong*. And I won't be choosing sides.

It sounds like what you're saying is that you are not willing to consider a compromise solution. I thought we had already agreed this is a toxic waste site and that as long as that continues, most are not going to be comfortable coming in here for any reason. So, your mission is sure to last your lifetime.

If this is the designated (one of four I've been told) War Zones at DU, then it will remain as unstable as the geographical areas on the planet where people refuse to concede in order to receive some portion. I was like that when I was a kid. If I couldn't have THREE SCOOPS of ice cream, I pouted and had none. My son was much wiser. I gave him the choice, one, two or none, and he ALWAYS chose two. He had a lot more ice cream than I ever did.

Perhaps your opponents will call a unilateral. Otherwise, those resourceful among us will seek out the information and work with each other to develop an area where we can be of service to each other. There really is no difference between us. This is a perfect example of what we do to another, we do to ourselves.

Thank you for conversing with me. Good night.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

56. Perhaps you should set an example and follow your own advice?

This forum was turned into a toxic waste dump by a tiny little clique.

They are a minority.

They do not own this forum.

This forum is for ALL DUers to post about issues related to health.

I don't buckle to pressure.

You want people to gently leave this forum to the clique.

My goal is to see the forum used more widely by more people, and to resist the harassment
of the tiny little clique.

Doyou want to follow your own advice, lead the way and start posting somewhere else,
I mean if you truly believe that the best place for diverse ideas is to be tucked somewhere out of sight?

[Why Syzygy]

57. You make some interesting points.

Others, I'm not sure what you're asking. We can discuss more later.

I'm leaving DU for the night. Sweet dreams.

[trotsky]

60. Who's the one who implies her "opponents" aren't Democrats?

Who's the one who implies her "opponents" take money from drug companies?

And the "tiny little clique" causes the problems?

I'm not going to buckle from YOUR pressure either. I'm not going to run from your personal attacks and insults (and considering your extensive history of deleted posts, you're a fine one to complain).

Take a good long look in that mirror, WYVBC.

[Why Syzygy]

70. I was hoping your quest

was for the betterment of humankind. Otherwise, I might question motivation for the information you present.

I know what it's like to have a burning desire to prove that my ideas/opinions have merit. But, what I have discovered is that some audiences will never agree. OTOH, what I have to offer WILL find a mark when I change my aim.

... I browsed around the forum this morning. While still not as expert on the situation as those who frequent the forum, it seems to me that there is something of an imbalance in how it provides rich and new content that educates and informs, that draws readers to DU, that provides a safe place to share ideas or concerns, or that provokes thought.

Not even all doctors will agree on pharmaceuticals. It is a field with a great deal of flux. Providers change their pharmacopoeias regularly, based mostly on financial considerations.

THESE ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT. I'm not trying to shove you away. I would be willing to discuss those issues as well. Would love to! But, that isn't even possible in such as situation as we have currently. So, most of us are being denied the opportunity to discuss and discover on two major areas.

Do you understand my point of view?

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

82. That would reward the abusers - the abuse is the problem

It seems that the basic premise of your suggestions so far is to
reward the abusers and their nasty actions by giving them exactly what they
want, to shut people up or hide them out of sight.


Those who are cowed by the abuse may leave, or they can stand tall and refuse
to be hounded out of here.

You don't reward the abusers by giving them what they want - shoving their
victims to some shit hold.

We that want to post about health issues will continue to post here.

Regardless of "the clique".

Feel free to make suggestions, but perhaps make them to the abusers.

The clique is in the minority. They are just louder and quite organized and
make it a point to glom onto anyone who disagrees with them, and hound them
until this forum is a toxic cesspool.

Letting them do that doesn't make this a good forum, it just makes it a one sided
forum, where only one opinion is allowed.

Worthless.

[Why Syzygy]

83. My premise

is not personal. It's about the forum.

Demilitarized zone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In military terms, a demilitarized zone (DMZ) is an area, usually the frontier or boundary between two or more military powers (or alliances), where military activity is not permitted, usually by peace treaty, armistice, or other bilateral or multilateral agreement. Often the demilitarized zone lies upon a line of control and forms a de-facto international border.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demilitarized_zone

That means people lay down their weapons. I still hear a few sniper shots.

[cosmik debris]

86. "Those who are cowed by the abuse may leave, "

Why should we allow your abusive tactics run us off?

We have a right to post in this forum too.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

67. Far more feel unwelcome here than feel welcome. ALL should feel welcome

Whether they agree or disagree.

[LeftishBrit]

73. They should. One step toward that end would be an absolute ban on anyone accusing those who disagree

of having any sort of corrupt or mercenary motive for their views.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

75. and prohibit the snide one liners and the deliberate

attemps by the "Clique" to try to harasss, insult, attack and falsely label
those they choose.

The Clique does not tolerate criticism of big pharma.
They do not tolerate criticism or different opinions about medicines.
They attack like teenage boys out joy riding and knocking over mail boxes.

They work hard to try to incite flame wars, as evidenced by their heavy presence
on any and all threads that I initiate.

As for their threads, I couldn't give a shit what they post and I do not
feel any value in commenting to their threads.

Not worth my time.

But Im sick of their viciousness and nastie tone, their destructiveness.

They seem to think they hold all of the answers and no one has the right to express different
views if the Clique deems those views to be "wrong".

[Dorian Gray]

89. You know...

I've been reading this thread out of curiosity. I have to admit that I'm in the middle here. I fully believe that vaccines are more beneficial than detrimental to society, yet I am interested in some alternative health suggestions and reading stories about personal experience.

I would love for a dialog to be possible in the Health forum.

Sure there are people who demand proof for claims regarding alternative therapies/etc and that may be somewhat disruptive. But a proper response to that type of post is either ignoring it or saying that your experience has led you to believe.........

Instead we have post after post accusing them... and then you becoming singularly and annoyingly focused on something that really makes no difference.

I'm sure that many of the Votes in the poll are from those who actually go against what you believe, yet they feel like their views are ignored or disparaged as well.

It does go both ways. There is a place here for give and take.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

122. Im sorry that you feel that way, but I do hope to see all viewpoints

represented here.

Not just those approved by some.

And I would like to see people be able to post without
being stalked or harassed.

It doesn't bother me if someone disagrees with me,
it does bother me if they stalk me, spam my threads with insults,and generally try to run me or other folks with opposing viewpoints away.

I generally don't post on threads if I am not interested in
the thread or do not support the OP or don't have a contribution.

My threads end up with flame wars initiated by the "Clique", and anyone who tries to post supportive comments gets flamed by the Clique.

On the other hand, I don't glom onto the Clique threads.

[Dorian Gray]

123. Just ignore their posts

then. By talking about those people, you are helping to perpetuate the problem. If you don't mention it and just discuss what you'd like to discuss, problem solved.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

76. PS

the "Clique" works VERY hard to try to incite flame wars and to try to
bring out hostility in those who they disagree with.

If not responded to, they post the exact same comments repeatedly, spamming up
the threads.

That is why I put the Clique on ignore, so that it is absolutely futile for
them to try to light a flame war.

They are SOOOO desperate for me to react to them.

Hence so many stalking style posts by them.

[varkam]

79. How's it feel up there on that cross?

I think it is the height of irony that, in a thread that you presumably started to draw attention to personal attacks, you engage in them.

Awesome.

[cosmik debris]

80. She is doing a righteous job of hiding from the truth

that she is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And all the people who might tell her that she is making people unwelcome are on her ignore list.

The longer she plays the game, the funnier it gets.

[Dorian Gray]

90. And

referring to them as the "Clique" over and over in this thread is divisive and continues on the course of perpetuating the problem in this forum.

[uppityperson]

101. I have posted the same thing over several times since the person wouldn't answer

The answer was always about something else, not answering the question. So I asked again. I wish people would answer, then ask me a question back or change the topic. Just changing the topic or attacking me doesn't answer and isn't a good reply. If I ask you a question, and you don't answer, I will ask again rather than being diverted to a side show.

So, I hope you don't include me in that take on "the clique" spamming

Personally I believe big pharm to mostly be a business to make money, with helping people being mostly a side effect for the CEOs. However, I also believe that in most cases vaccination is positive. And I believe that malnutrition and lifestyles, including environmental issues, impact health a lot. I also don't believe that "natural"=safe all the time either.

[Dorian Gray]

108. My take

is pretty much like your take on the situation. I have the same opinions regarding the drug companies, the CEOs, and Vaccines.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

136. I agree with your personal opinion on big pharm and vaccination

and also "natural" isn't always safe or desirable.

I also believe that what is established as the "best advice" can end up being totally wrong,
like 20 years of Docs prescribing hormones to women for menopause, and then finding out they
were setting these women up for breast cancer.

[Why Syzygy]

51. oooh..

I don't want to keep editing that post, because something might go missing.

I think I'm gaining an understanding of why I'm in here today. Besides the fact that DU was so slow waking up this morning ..

If all goes well, a LOT of people who's health has been compromised (read poor people), especially the past 8 years, are going to becoming eligible for medical care. Where will we sort it out? I find DU to be an immense resource guide. For those who are completely lost in the new system, it seem DU-ish to have a place for them to easily access that information.

I don't believe the cries of those who claim that progressives don't care about poor people. I hope we care about them more than tribal conflicts. But, tribalism is a strange agent.

[cosmik debris]

14. It is obvious that YOU do not welcome differing view points

as demonstrated by your bitter name calling and spamming.

Are you expecting others to do what you refuse to do?

[Liberal Veteran]

16. You are entitled to your opinion, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

17. 12 people "do NOT feel that differing viewpoints are welcome in this forum"

Mabye its the one liners, or the stalking. There's alot of that going on here,
has been for years.

[LeftishBrit]

18. For at least one of these 12 people..

it is neither of those things. It is the truly VILE accusations of having mercenary motives for the views that we have.

You seem remarkably sure that all the people who feel their views are unwelcome are people with views similar to yourself! You are wrong on that.

[cosmik debris]

19. I voted NO

because of the way the OP treats those who disagree with her.

She makes this group extremely inhospitable to all who do not share her opinions and she posts the same stuff over and over in order to overwhelm those who dissent.

I thought the poll was a test of whether she was successful at making others unwelcome.

[uppityperson]

102. I almost voted no for the same reason, but "welcome" is such an subjective thing

and I am so clueless I try to feel welcome wherever I go.

[Why Syzygy]

20. What's the solution?

Do we need to conduct blind studies to prove that we cannot control anyone's behavior, other than our own?

Lots of us would truly like a healthy "Health" forum. How do we get there? Or is it just a lost cause?

I rarely come in here. This forum is in my list on the Latest page, but I only click it if all the other groups/forums have no new posts to read. All the bad ju ju back and forths are *unhealthy*. Does anyone here dispute that?

Does it make ANYONE HERE feel stronger and more vibrant after a good smack down?
If so, there is clearly the issue. Some feel stronger from the venom. Others of us are weakened by it.

What then?

[HamdenRice]

23. There is no solution short of tombstones

As long as a certain small group of people continue to squat here -- the same group that also squats in the Skeptics, Religion, and Atheism forums/groups -- with the mindless, unreasoning, implacable persistence of Zimbabwean lowfeld warthogs defending a dung-filled mud wallow, and with the goal of making every DUer who is not part of their anti-intellectual cult as miserable as humanly possible, I don't see how this forum could change.

Like barnacles, they will cling here forever unless forcibly scraped off.

Thankfully, this little scourge, like certain non-metastatic cancers, is self-limited to the above-mentioned four forums, and if the cancer is contained, there will continue to be many other parts of DU in which to have fruitful discussions.

Everyone on DU simply won't be able to discuss health or religion, but that's a small price to pay for the quarantine of the disease.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

30. I refuse to go away, in fact, the nastier they get

the more determined it makes me to post articles here.

They aren't making headway, skepticism about the FDA and Big Pharma
is mainstream now.

Too many people have been hurt by the abuse of the cronies in the FDA and
Big Pharma's greed.

PHarma has its place, but unfortunately profit is so huge that scrupals are
almost non existant in some cases.

[uppityperson]

33. Yeah, well a lot of those tombstones are 1 person who has been banned before.

They make a new username up and come back. That is against the rules. Haven't seen it back in last week though, maybe is taking a break?

[Why Syzygy]

37. Check my reading comprehension.

Since I'm not a regular, I have no idea who has squatter's rights. I find myself in about the same quandary as when trying to decide my position on I/P.

You answered my question of whether or not this is *healthy*. I got, "no". Cancer is not.

So, this is the Holy Land of DU?

Since it is a toxic site (forum), this feud resembles two factions fighting over a tattered tent city sitting on Yucca Mountain. For whatever reason, that tent city means EVERYTHING to the contenders. Trucks full of contamination arrive daily to keep the pile growing. There is enough radioactivity to kill everyone in both factions several times over.

Meanwhile, interested parties drive by. They aren't interested in possessing the toxic waste or the mountain. They were led to believe there is gold in the mountain. They have various ideas on how to retrieve it, what to do with it, what it might mean to possess the gold. That much gold could be a great benefit to millions of others. But, it can't be mined. The squatter's power struggles are blocking entry. Toxic residue would have to be minimized in order to reach their treasure. The trucks coming in, and squatters stealing a tent and then another, until the second faction comes back around and steals them back again, stirs up so much toxic air, it's impossible to breathe.

Health care is one of the top agenda items on our President's desk. That's because a lot of thinking AND feeling people drove by and made it important enough. Squatters have no interest in benefiting anyone. They only want to prove their right to possess the toxic site.

I still don't know what to think of this. Have to mull.

[Lyric]

146. You want to have 'fruitful discussions??' Ha.

You attack anyone who disagrees with you with a vicious, sneering contempt that completely precludes the 'discussion' you supposedly wish to engage in. Reality check: 'discussions' require the respectful exchange of opposing viewpoints. You have zero respect for people who oppose you, and you make that perfectly clear.

"Zimbabwean lowfeld warthogs"

"barnacles" that need to be "scraped off"

"scourge"

"metastatic cancers"

"disease"

You honestly think that anyone is going to believe that you want 'fruitful discussion' when you use such contemptuous, vile words to describe your opposition? And that's just in ONE post! You claim that those terms only apply to shit-stirrers, but how convenient it is that everyone who opposes you just happens to be a shit-stirrer--as defined by you.

You don't want discussion. You want an echo chamber, with all inconvenient contrary opinions summarily removed. You say you dislike shit-stirring, and yet drama and shit-stirring seem to follow you around from forum to forum. There are two most-likely reasons why. The first is that there's a big, DU-wide conspiracy to irritate you. The second is that you play a significant part in it yourself.

Since I really don't think that you're important enough to merit a multi-forum conspiracy, I'm gonna go with the latter. I'm usually just a lurker around here, but I've seen you elsewhere, and I know damned well that you're not even close to being innocent. If you want to root out the sources of the drama and conflict, you won't have to look far to find one of the culprits. Any available mirror will work just fine.

[cosmik debris]

25. A separate forum for CTers. Like the 9/11 forum. n/t

[Why Syzygy]

26. "CTers"? Please define. nt

[cosmik debris]

29. Conspiracy theory promoters

A lot of fights in GD were moved to the 9/11 conspiracy forum and it made it a much calmer place to visit.

I suggest that this forum would be a lot more calm if the big pharma conspiracy theory promoters had their own forum. Then threads like the MS/stem cell threads would not get buried by the big pharma CTers.

[Why Syzygy]

41. Is the "Drug Policy" forum

reasonable? What I also wonder is if that is the solution, to move to another forum, then won't the *issues* just relocate?

With OOPS post, I was trying to understand the need to have dominion over what someone else is posting. I've seen the arguments with skeptics vs woo woo. But, what I don't understand is why there is such a NEED to control information? From a rational standpoint, one should be able to just say, that's not logical, I'm more interested in things that are, so I'll move along. I also seem to remember something about concern for how DU/Democrats look when irrational stuff is left unchallenged. But it seems to me that there is no rational basis for that *concern*. Wouldn't that conclusion have to be derived from an emotional view? Everyone both thinks and feels. Not everyone is versed with the skill of logic. Some try to learn it, others completely get it. And there are all shades in between.

I was speaking to a friend tonight who told me about a series of email exchanges she had with her brother, a GW fundie. He went to Midland for the 50 min return speech. He lives in Lubbock. My friend, his sister, lives in Austin. He wrote to tell her all about it, how the whole deal honored GW's "home town" of Midland. He claimed that GW went to a local hs there, which is inaccurate. He is a big blow hard type that goes around town boasting. In order to perhaps save him some embarrassment, she sent him links showing that GW went to a prep school . yada yada. He was highly offended. First, he blamed her "hostility and Bush hatred" on the fact that she lived in Austin. He said he was so glad he didn't live in Austin! harrumph . He went on to ADMIT that he would rather believe a falsehood than allow her to prove him wrong. He said that, I would rather be WRONG (than allow her hatred for Bush to correct him). The construct of good ole neighbor boy George is so powerful for him, that he cannot let it go, even if there are NEUTRAL FACTS that show otherwise. He even objected to her sending him information directly from Bush's library with the information as she stated it. How would you like to debate that guy? She and I agreed that her mental health would be better served to let someone else in town be the one to set him straight, if it even could be done. As it went down, she allowed herself to become emotionally invested in him accepting the FACTS to the point that she was drained, and the result was nil. No, worse really. Now he is even more entrenched in his defiance.
"If eating chocolate is wrong, I don't want to be right".

What? Is the purpose to these exchanges? In her case, she got to see his irrational behavior in action, once more. There is still stasis. What's the point? If someone at DU slams me, sometimes I want to slam back. If my emotions don't become involved at all, I can calmly step aside and allow the irrationality of the opponent expose itself. That is, to anyone with the ability to perceive it.

I dunno.

[cosmik debris]

62. Some posters are not welcome in any moderate forum.

For example, a poster who starts 3 or 4 threads a day claiming that big pharma is killing little girls with a sex vaccine is not likely to find a welcome where moderate people meet to discuss various health related topics.

A poster who claims that big pharma is engaged in a world wide multi national conspiracy to withhold a cure for diabetes is not likely to be welcome in a moderate forum.

A poster who repeatedly post theories that big pharma is causing autism for profit with evil vaccines is not likely to be welcome in a moderate forum.

A poster who responds to disagreement by posting twice as much of the same old shit is not likely to be welcomed in a moderate forum.

A poster who rejects all evidence that contradicts her conspiracy theory is not likely to be welcomed in a moderate forum.

Such a poster makes the forum inhospitable for all concerned.

And she complains that it is some one else's fault.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

28. perhaps

Perhaps two forums -

one for people who want more research for meds, vaccines, and who are critical
against Big Pharma abuse.

and

one forum for people who don't want more research for meds, vaccs and who bristle
at criticism against Big Pharma. This includes the advocacy for the "one size fits all" vaccine strategy. Some believe that all vacs are equally good for all people and there is no need to do research to make vaccines safer for the vulnerable populations.

That seems to be how the lines are drawn.

Any thread I initiate that criticizes Big Pharma or the ONE SIZE FITS ALL VACCINE APPROACH
ends up with a brigade of flame war starters.

You can look at my threads and see the one or two word zinger comments that insult
and attack, and if anyone responds to the zingers, it feeds the flame war.
The purpose is to try to discredit the OPs I post.

As for the threads started by the Zingers - I don't bother with them. Im not interested
and feel no need to participate.

I've been posting at DU for years, and posted thousands of times, and NEVER EVER have
I put anyone on ignore until this week end.

I got tired of reading the immature nasty and hostile comments, and so Im done with them.
I refuse to waste my time.

There's a difference in disagreeing and being vioious and nasty.
So I don't have to read the nasty any more.

[Liberal Veteran]

32. Go democrats!

:eyes:

[uppityperson]

34. And what about those of us who are in the middle, who want more research and don't trust big pharm?

Of course there will be those on the edges of both, but many of us are in the middle also.

[trotsky]

35. The people you describe don't exist.

There is no one in this forum who doesn't think we need more research on drugs, treatments, AND vaccines.

There is no one in this forum who believes "all vacs are equally good for all people and there is no need to do research to make vaccines safer for the vulnerable populations."

There is no one in this forum who advocates a "ONE SIZE FITS ALL VACCINE APPROACH."

These are all your strawmen, your dishonest distortions of positions that real people hold. No wonder you lash out and insult and attack - you evidently believe that disagreeing with you means we all sit in a big pharma boardroom rubbing our hands with glee when a child is diagnosed with autism.

You start this thread with the intention of calling out and shaming the people who disagree with you, but instead you show how much YOU distort and shout down and engage in discussion-squelching behavior yourself.

It could very well be argued that it is you, and others who have made their obligatory appearance to insult and call names, who cause the problems you then complain about.

Think about it. We ARE all Democrats, despite what you think.

[Why Syzygy]

38. I'm wondering why

pharma posts aren't deemed to be appropriately posted in the "Drug Policy" forum. They're talking about legalizing weed over there, btw.

Has that question ever been addressed?

[trotsky]

58. The phrase "Drug Policy" has historically referred to illegal drugs.

That's probably why.

[varkam]

63. That is the implied use. eom

[trotsky]

64. Yeah for big pharma shills like you, that we know.

I'm talking about us Democrats. :P

[varkam]

65. I'll have to get Mitch McConnell on the phone to take care of that for me, then.

:rofl:

[Liberal Veteran]

21. False choice.

Some differing opinions are welcome.

Some not so much. Turning the health forum into a personal playground with attention seeking behavior or nonsense is surely not conducive to rational discussion.

[Why Syzygy]

22. False choice?

When I make a choice to click "Health" forum dependent on how it might affect my overall health at that particular moment, I'm choosing between two false choices?

Or, are you questioning whether or not it is unhealthy to engage in combative behavior?
You have an opinion, somewhere in your mind or body experience of your reality.
You can tell by the way you FEEL, in your body. You know when you don't feel well, don't you?
Or? What? Will you explain it to me?

But, you make a couple of good points. "Some" opinions are welcome. That's not democratic or terribly progressive, so I might question whether or not it is in keeping with the general objective of DU's policy.

But, we don't have to go there. WHY are they not welcome? Because they are not rational?

So assumption A for you is that discussions relating to health issues are required to be rational. Does it follow then, that if they are not rational, there is some compelling force for some to make sure that is not overlooked? How does that particular experience "feel". Your body is woven throughout with muscles and nerves that send feedback to tell the thinking part of yourself . what to do next. It is a queasy feeling? A mental blast? I know when something emotional gets to me, I tense up, speed up and get a huge shot of adrenalin which has prepared me for fight or flight. Is it that way if you are dealing from a purely rational motive as well?

Thanks for giving me some input.

OOOPS .. :blush: I thought this was a reply to my post.
I'm still interested in getting feedback.

[Liberal Veteran]

27. For example....some people are of the opinion that HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

I would consider that an unwelcome opinion and a bad idea to propagate.

[Why Syzygy]

42. AFAIK, HIV doesn't ALWAYS lead to AIDS..

AIDS being the progressed stage with symptoms. People can be infected, test positive, for HIV without symptoms.

But, why? What is the outcome of someone having and stating that viewpoint? Surely there is objective data to define the issue?

And exactly how does one "propagate" that opinion? What are the steps involved?

HIV is sure to be on our Health agendas as we move forward. Seems to me the Surgeon General has the huge responsibility to provide accurate information which is readily available. We have a lot of slack to pick up from the neglect on this and many other topics.

As long as other certain steps are taken, from precaution to treatment, and as long as it isn't the Surgeon General who is misinformed, does a mistaken opinion make a difference? I have an example for that, which indicates, no. My mother knew an elderly woman who had been married and had a son. She had lived well into her 90s. I knew her, and she was an amazement. However, this woman had a complete lack of knowledge on how her female part was constructed. My mother was astonished to discover that B had never known about the additional *plumbing feature*. Yet, she had a successful marriage and bore a child. Of course one would have wanted her to have all the facts long before she was 90! But the efficacy of the parts was not affected.

Or am I missing something?

[uppityperson]

61. There is a tendency among a lot of people to avoid dealing with an issue.

Hence, if HIV doesn't "always" lead to AIDS, and the infection can go on for a long time without symptoms, why then deal with discussing such a thing with a potential partner? After all, it really isn't such a big thing and discussing it could break the mood. Besides, why bother getting tested since it isn't really such a big thing any more and testing is scary because then you would find out if you do or not and have to deal with it?

Those are reasons saying HIV doesn't cause AIDS is not a good thing. IMO this is one of the reasons HIV infections and AIDS is on the rise again/still. I also think that this is more of an intellectual nitpicking argument, semantics, rather than reality based. I do like to argue semantics at times, but people need to be aware that the argument is that.

Another poor logic thing that I've seen, followed by insults and calling of names on several sides is if something is good for you, more is better. This can be vitamins (where too little IS bad) or even aspirin (2 don't work for I take 6 at a time, and now my ears are ringing. True story, friend told me this).

Then there are those who do not understand how meds work, or what they are.
(I took 2 aspririn for my headache, 2 for my backache, 2 for my stomach ache, 2 for my sore shoulder, and now my ears are ringing. That is a true story from someone I talked with as a nurse).

Then there are those who espouse "natural" remedies or foods without understanding how they work, or what they are. (I threw up all last night after eating plants I found in the woods. I thought I knew what they were, and deer were eating them so they should have been safe. Another true story from another friend.) (talking with a person who did quality control in a "natural vitamin" factory, told me that only a small % of what was in them had to be "natural" to get that label and his job consisted of boringly watching as they passed by to make sure were fully coated)

As a nurse who lives in the woods and has worked in all sorts of jobs, I have run across a lot of people. I try to not insult, try to keep an open mind, but there is a difference between not knowing men have penises or telling someone HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

[Liberal Veteran]

72. True, and the flu virus doesn't always lead to pneumonia.

Although in better than 90 percent of cases, people with HIV will progress to advanced HIV disease (formerly called AIDS).

Yet, there is group of people who believe that HIV is a huge conspiracy and that the condition known as AIDS doesn't exist. From time to time they try to propagate their beliefs in health forums.

So, those are the kinds of opinions I would say are unwelcome here (and from time to time, the mods have shut down people for making their arguments because they aren't based in any real science and possibly dangerous).

[SidDithers]

59. Some "differing" viewpoints deserve nothing but ridicule...

such as your hissy fit in this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=222&topic_id=39206, including this gem:

no one here wants more women to get cervical cancer, but it is possible Gardasil CAUSES cancer.

Sid

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

66. 18 People "do NOT feel that differing viewpoints are welcome in this forum"

So we know this forum suffers badly from rot, now time for the difficult cure.

[varkam]

68. As was posted above, several of those 18 have been on the receiving end...

of your ad hominem attacks of shill or republican. You do understand that, as much as you would like to believe otherwise, you are part of the same "problem" that those you accuse of being are.

[SidDithers]

69. I suspect all of the ones who posted that above...

are being "ignored" by our "friend"

Go Democrats!

Sid

[varkam]

71. Problem solved, it would appear.

Go Democrats!

[uppityperson]

103. Will you quit accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being shills?

That would help. Or of being part of a "clique", which I still can't find. (maybe they are hiding from me) That would also help us feel more welcome.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

74. 19 people NOT feel that differing viewpoints are welcome in this forum

and its time for that to change.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

77. we're up to 20 - time to start making all feel welcome here

that can be achieve by stopping the personal attacks,
staying away from threads if you can't do anything except savage the OP writer or commenters,
do not spam or glom onto threads because you hate someone,

There's more, but the bottom line is that there are many people who
would like to participate in this forum, talk about many issues,
discuss and ask questions,
post news and OPs,
but
we have a hostile environment right now.

[varkam]

78. I'm glad to hear that you'll not be calling other posters shills or trolls

just because they disagree with you, then. It's about time!

[trotsky]

88. I totally agree with you.

We DO have a hostile environment. Someone insists on grouping others into a "clique," implies that people who disagree with her aren't Democrats, accuses her opponents of being paid pharmaceutical shills, calls certain people "sick puppies" or "fleas" or "ticks," and generally engages in disrespectful behavior as illustrated by her numerous deleted posts - deleted by DU's fine moderators who found the posts to be AGAINST THE RULES. I truly hope that individual can learn something from this thread.

[Dorian Gray]

91. And that goes both ways....

I am sure that many of those votes are from the very people that YOU have on ignore.

[beam me up scottie]

81. "Have you found that your threads are spammed with flame war type comments?" You mean like these?:

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-03-08 09:56 PM
Original message

Posting threads that criticize Big Pharma products draw harassment
Has anyone noticed that if anyone posts a news article that is critical of big pharma products,
they get harassed?

Notice that some people will follow people from thread to thread harassing them
and trying to run them off of the health forum?

Notice the same people defend any and all vaccines any and all big pharma no matter
what the record of that big pharma or that vaccine?

Notice that some people care more about big pharma than they do about real people?

Notice that the same few people have been harassing posters in the Health Forum for
more than a year?

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-03-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #35

37. maybe your mom took away your video games
you sure are a sick puppy.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-11-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #58

69. the freepers have a "hard on" for Gardasil too
strange bedfellows. They love and defend Merck too.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Tue Aug-19-08 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #13

16. you have to wonder just how much Ghostwriting Merck has their employees doing, and where
If they are corrupt enough to have their employees ghostwrite papers and have it palmed off
as objective experts' work, then imagine when and where a company that big could have
their ghostwriters posting?

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Tue Aug-19-08 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. actually the pro-pharma make personal attacks rather than attacking facts
notice that?

If I post a thread with a news item and links, they glom onto this thread, like fleas to a dog.
Or ticks. They suck the blood out of the person posting the thread until they are fat like ticks,
and in this case, they never fall off until a new host or victim is available (new thread)

Like fleas or ticks, they need a host, because they do nothing on their own.

Blood suckers.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Sat Aug-23-08 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #22

34. The blind faith in big pharma/big corp is stunning
considering this is a democratic forum.

However, this is the only group at Du that exhibits such blind trust of
the big corporations.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Wed Jan-14-09 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #19

34. remember, some people have never heard of a vaccine they didn't just love
and defend.

Its a long standing thing here in the Health forum.

There are certain people to whom any and all vaccines are God.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Sun Jan-25-09 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #14

15. come rushing to protect Big Pharma
surprise.

WillYourVoteBCounted (1000+ posts) Sat Jan-31-09 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #77

79. There are some who don't want Autism prevented or cured
otherwise they would be emphasizing the need to find out the cause.

its frustrating to see, its hard to believe that there is that much
evil in the world, but that is what it is.

that is why I don't respond to those who WANT to keep the causes of Autism
from being revealed.

Remember, if we find out what really causes Autism, some Big Pharma might
lose money when forced to discard millions of $ worth of inventory.

Greed. Evil.

[varkam]

84. go democracts

:rofl:

[cosmik debris]

85. That's enough to make 21 people feel unwelcome

And her poll shows that 21 people feel that way.

And she still thinks it is some one else's fault.

[trotsky]

87. ZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ouch, that would physically hurt to have one's hypocrisy pointed out like that.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

92. 21 do not feel that differing viewpoints are welcome

Time for the clique to stop initiating flame wars and glomming onto
threads of people that they hate.

One liners lose their charm when used repeatedly to try to hijack threads
and harass the people posting them.

[LeftishBrit]

94. How many of these 21 are people who feel unwelcome because we disagree with YOUR viewpoint?

At least 2 here. At least 11 in my separate poll.

Actually I don't even mind my views being 'unwelcome; but I do mind the INDESCRIBABLY HURTFUL and indeed VILE accusations of having mercenary motives, when some of us are patients or relatives of patients whose motive is concern to preserve our access to medicines and vaccines that you consider as Big Pharma promotions, but we consider as necessary to our own or our families' well-being. And some of us are campaigners for more, not less, access to medicines and vaccines in developing countries.

Say we're wrong all you want, but PLEASE DO NOT CALL US MERCENARY! NOT EVER! EVER! EVER! You seem to rely on emotion to convince others. Well, some of us have emotions too!

[trotsky]

95. It's simple, LB.

She doesn't see her own hurtful attacks. And if someone does point them out to her, she just puts that person on ignore. Heck, since you don't bash the entire pharmaceutical industry with the same zeal, you might already be on her ignore list.

[Dorian Gray]

96. I think what you are missing is that there are people

on the other side of the positions that you hold that feel just as attacked or unwelcome as you say you do. If you want to reconcile that, it's possible. You need to give a little to take a little.

[Liberal Veteran]

106. Fascinating that this thread underscores the rage of Caliban at seeing his own face in the glass.

If I may borrow a line from your picture.

[uppityperson]

104. I almost voted no because of your nasty replies. Seriously.

Please stop the nasty accusations. There are better ways to deal with people you disagree with. Better, more positive ways. Alert on them, tell the mods why (spam or stalking). Or ignore them. Posting nasty accusations back really doesn't help.

[LeftishBrit]

93. I find Dorian Gray's and Why Syzygy's posts very interesting and helpful

Sometimes it's easy to become mired in one's own frustration.

Contrary to how I might be perceived here, I am not a flamer or quarreller on most forums; I prefer peaceful negotiation on forums, as in far more important arenas; and have on the whole managed to survive OK in another forum noted for its controversy. But I think what gets me upset is the sheer *hate* that I perceive from some of the very strong opponents of Pharma, toward those whose antipathy is less strong (very few of us here are in fact *pro*-Pharma). There is aggressiveness on both sides. But I rarely perceive the same HATRED from pro-vaccine people against the strong Pharma critics (I'm attempting to use the same labels that both groups would use for themselves). Contempt, sarcasm, dismissiveness - yes, that happens on both sides. But the HATRED is mostly on one side. I haven't noticed the pro-vaccine people telling the strong Pharma critics to 'rot in hell' or asking them if they 'sleep easy at night' or accusing them of being mercenary shills or of 'fucking up children', for example. And being mocked or told one is stupid, however unpleasant, is not on the same level. As is recognized by most legal systems: you generally cannot sue someone for making fun of you, or calling you stupid; you *can* sue over unjust accusations of venality. I am not obviously implying that anyone could or should sue here - no one uses their real names after all! - just that most legal systems would agree with me that false accusations of corruption or of deliberately injuring children for profit are far worse than mere sarcasm or ridicule.

It's the HATRED that discourages and sometimes intimidates me. I would entirely support having a new forum for vaccine debates (I might not even go there!) and keeping the Health forum for other issues. As a citizen of a country which has universal health care, but where it's been weakened by successive governments, I feel I could have something to contribute to general discussions of health policy; but these tend to get overshadowed by the vaccine debates.

[Dorian Gray]

97. That's the thing

I think some people are reacting emotionally to things that really don't need to be reacted to that way.

Trust me, I'm probably a little bit more into alternative health care than some of those posters here, though I also would never go that route to the detriment of traditional Western Health Care. I'm interested in articles about acupuncture, vitamins, eating well, exercise, diabetes care, cancer care, vaccines, etc. I'd love to read them all and discuss.

And yeah, sometimes people are a little snarky. It happens in the world. Some people might find probiotics to be nonsense, others might find acupuncture to be a whole bunch of hooey, while still others might uphold the inanity of nuturopathic remedies. Who cares if someone thinks you are an idiot for not getting a flu shot? If it's something that you want to discuss/trade info on, then just do it and ignore those posters. Say: "I'm sorry that you don't want to try those things, but I've found success with it, and I'm quite happy to continue using it."

I will voice my opinion if I think that advice against getting a proper medical diagnosis is endangered because of the distrust of "Big Pharma," though.

This type of thing comes up in the Religion and Theology topic sometimes, and you just have to understand that people have different opinions on things. There is no reason to take things so personally. And accusing someone of being a Big Pharma shill is not a reasonable reaction to someone who thinks that vaccines are important for children to get.

[Why Syzygy]

98. You know, over the weekend, I was attacked in LBN..

After about three exchanges, I could tell that I was dealing with someone who was not LISTENING, but continued to hurl invectives. My second attempt I tried to make personal contact and let that person know where I was coming from. Still no rationality. She just kept screaming "SNARK"! I went back and deleted every post I had used to try to make a connection. I was offering a little bit of who I am. I'm worth more than to have my rawness stabbed over and over. Eventually other people came along. Some of them disagreed with me and some agreed. It turned into a good thread. I guess we were lucky. But, had others not come along, that thread would have had my *delete* posts and her shrill accusations, and would have died. That was okay with me because at least my vulnerabilities wouldn't have been permanently archived facing off with someone who was clearly unreachable. I'm not saying this is the way to go in every case. But, I'm not getting into a screaming match with someone who's not paying attention. At least that day :D

[Dorian Gray]

105. I think that is an all too common phenomenon

on the internets... sadly.

I've been there myself. Now I generally know it's not worth getting my ire up about it.

[SidDithers]

99. 22!! 22 posters now feel unwelcome posting here...

HaHaHa



Sid

[trotsky]

100. LMAO

:spank:

[semillama]

107. Make that 24!

The funny thing is, there IS a group where "alternative healing modalities" or what ever non-scientifically based medicines are being called these days - it's called "Astrology, Spirituality and Alternative Healing." I don't think there's a lot of cross-pollination of posters in that group and in this forum. But perhaps certain posters who crouch upon this forum like so many gargoyles would find their opinions more "welcome" there.

I for one think a forum devoted to Health issues should be first and foremost governed by a firm foundation and regard for the scientific method, logic, and reason. But apparently that can be construed as the equivalent of farting in a dinner guest's soup.

[Dorian Gray]

109. I do think that there

is room here for discussion regarding nutrition, vitamins, and overall health topics. (It's not called Healthcare... if it were, I'd agree with you that it should stick entirely to the scientific method.)

What I hate to see is a constant barrage of denying any proper healthcare is important while upholding unproven methods as a cure. That can be dangerous for people. Alternative care is fine as long as it's a supplementation to traditional care. Especially for serious diseases. It's one thing to get Acupuncture because your back hurts. But for cancer? No!!!!!

[trotsky]

110. Even that can be tricky.

Alternative care is fine as long as it's a supplementation to traditional care.

But then you've got "alternative" items like St. John's Wort that can actually interfere with some "traditional" medications. The bottom line is, if something "alternative" can actually be shown to work, then it's not "alternative" anymore and becomes "traditional." So let's study things, but if the studies don't pan out, people should acknowledge that "Well, it works for me" doesn't mean anything.

[Why Syzygy]

111. When it comes to something like pain relief

"it works for me" is all I'm looking for. Well. That and no harm, of course.

[trotsky]

112. "That and no harm, of course."

Which you cannot know unless it's subjected to rigorous testing - and even then, you might not find some things out until release to the general population. Whether it's a new drug, a supplement, or a "natural" treatment. (Listed in order of amount of testing and follow-up required.)

[Why Syzygy]

113. Tart cherry juice

can be trusted, I believe. I'm planning to post something about it at some point. Testing of time is valid. Not every beneficial "treatment" is a new creation.

edit to add: I'm hoping there's a placebo effect included, because I would love to use it for age reversal :evilgrin:

[trotsky]

114. How much of it, though, and in conjunction with what other drugs or treatments?

Grapefruit juice interferes with many medications.

[Why Syzygy]

115. It sure does (grapefruit juice)

I'll try to get the information together sometime later today.
In conjunction with what other meds: work with your doctor.

I'll give you a preview... I used to take Celebrex. Worked very well for me. However, my current insurance company doesn't cover it. It's $3.00 per unit. When I've been able to afford it, I will sometimes go to Walgreens and get 10 at a time. I just can't afford to have it on a consistent basis. Meanwhile, if there is an affordable food product that helps, I'm willing to give it a personal trial for the chance of relief for my chronic pain, which is harmful to my quality of life and personal relationships. Stay tuned. ;)

Another facet of the story is that cherry growers are not allowed to make "medical claims" without the FDA reclassifying cherries as a "medication". I'm fine with that. I'm just not fine with someone denying me the use of cherry juice! And, in the same vein, I wouldn't want cherry growers allowed to artificially raise the price just due to healthful properties that are inherent in cherries.

[Why Syzygy]

116. How

could that discussion be framed in a way that inspires constructive dialog?
Sensationalizing it would be counter productive, and imo, dishonest.

[trotsky]

117. Well that's the problem.

Some of us insist that things like double-blind controlled studies are required. Others will say our insistence on that proves we're closed-minded or shills for big pharma because pharma will make sure that such studies fail, as part of the global conspiracy by American pharmaceutical companies controlling all researchers and all institutions around the world. And thus it descends.

[Why Syzygy]

118. The thing about studies..

is even in the clinical trials, symptoms are reported on a subjective basis by the patient. There are the measurements, of course. And birth control obviously has an objective outcome. But, even for psych meds, they use a combination of "observable" and "subjective" data.

[trotsky]

120. Of course.

To re-use an old quote about democracy: Controlled studies are the worst way to determine the efficacy and safety of something - except for all the other methods.

[Why Syzygy]

119. Hey ..

don't know if you'd be interested in a couple of antidotes .. I pre-screened for a trial study. Due to my past side effects history, I do not qualify. That would be, unless they are testing something specific to a target with a history of an inability to tolerate. I was selected, however (not by the same establishment), to take part in a market survey panel pertaining to a prescription medication (not one I've ever taken). Just interesting.

edit: Participants are paid in both of these programs.

[Dorian Gray]

121. I would always tell my doctors what I am taking

or doing in conjunction with what they are doing. But, I'm speaking more about acupuncture, which was actually recommended to me by my doctor in my fertility pursuit. She had said she read some promising studies on success rates with acupuncture in conjunction with IVF. She couldn't promise that it was anything more than a placebo affect, but she told me to try it if I didn't mind paying the money for it. So... I did.

My docs are aware that I am doing this, and they've been supportive. Despite their support, I still consider it alternative care.

[Why Syzygy]

124. One doctor

whom I told I was taking St. John's wort, convinced me to give it up. However, he did so in a respectful manner and with information I could investigate. If he had just poo-poo'd without offering any REASONABLE explanation, I wouldn't have been so inclined to trust him. It's the doctors who are so closed minded and arrogant to their patients that discourage a healthful working relationship.

[sister taoist]

125. I have found this site to be a profound disappointment

I also went to the 9/11 site and found the same types spamming it. Totally dominating it and discouraging free expression. I cannot help but believe that the Illuminati is somehow involved.

Oh, and yes, pharm/"health" field shills, too...:tinfoilhat:

[Why Syzygy]

126. The overwhelming compulsion

the irrational NEED to prove something 'wrong', the OBSESSION with allowing only certain information .. these are the things which no one has offered to explain.

We can do better. I'm thinking we will. It takes a lot to discourage me.

[sister taoist]

127. That's what I mean..."they" swoop in any time someone tries to post something

which doesn't involve popping pills. They are bullies of the highest magnitude. Very arrogant and smug. Throwing around medical terms, as if that makes their points any more valid! This site is atrocious, for what it purports to be about, and I think these types should be the ones controlled and not genuine seekers of healthy ideas and pertinent health topics...

Thank you for stepping up and saying what really needed to be said! The poll speaks for itself!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

135. Thanks, Sister. This happens on ALL of my threads -but I leave their threads alone

meanwhile they pout and spew.

I've been labeled "anti vax", when the truth is I am a skeptic who doesn't trust Big Pharma
who happens to be fastracking a non emergency vaccine to experiment on our young girls, and soon
our young boys if they get their way.

And that vaccination - made by Merck and fast tracked just in time to help Merck survive the multi billion payout over their VIOX disaster.

Merck knwe their drug would kill thousands and kept that info hidden.

Why should I trust Merck with my daughters health, and so soon?

There is no reason to believe that Merck has changed their ways.

Its not just Merck, its the lack of regulation and the greed profit factor

They do it because they can.

And if you post about it here, you will get flamed.

I just put the "clique" on ignore, and I don't bother their OPs or threads.

Let them have their opinion, but the harassment on my threads has to stop.

They are trying to stop anyone who they disagree with from posting here.

[uppityperson]

137. maybe you leave "their" threads alone because they are all on ignore?

They post on your threads and are bad, but you can't see theirs so don't post there and are good?

I am confused. I am also tired as I worked 11 hrs today.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

142. no, Uppity - I put them on ignore after getting fed up their spamming of my threads

I endured the childish and nasty comments posted by the Clique for a very long time.
It was so obvious what they were doing, that I finally decided to just put them on ignore.

You see, the Clique makes it a point to harass those who they disagree with.

Myself, I left their threads alone, always have. If they want to have a different opinion,
thats fine with me, but they didn't share the same philosophy.

With the Clique - their goal is to disrupt any thread that they don't like.
They've run off people this way, and they want to run me off.

They don't want me to post OPs or threads that they disagree with, and they will
do anything to try to stop me.

On the other hand, I don't and HAVE NOT bothered with their threads. PERIOD.
Now, I just don't see their stupid childish comments any more.

So they follow me around, trying to initimidate me or anyone else who disagrees with them, while
I don't bother with them. I took their shit for a long time before putting them on ignore.

They do not deserve my attention, and I hope others will not be run off by the Clique's harassment.

There SHOULD be different viewpoints here.

[varkam]

143. Delusions of grandeur are funny.

[cosmik debris]

144. ROFL! "Myself, I left their threads alone, always have." Oooookay

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=43007&mesg_id=43007

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=43006&mesg_id=43006

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=40692&mesg_id=40692

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=17828&mesg_id=17828

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=17583&mesg_id=17583

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=16662&mesg_id=16662

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=52230&mesg_id=52230

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=48512&mesg_id=48512

[SidDithers]

147. That's almost as funny as 0 fer 18...

almost :)

Sid

[varkam]

148. I have the feeling that words like "dishonesty" and "hypocrisy"

are lost on that one. Of course, it helps to put anyone who dare point that out to her on ignore.

[SidDithers]

149. She's got passive-aggressive down to a science too...

Go Democrats!! :)

Sid

[cosmik debris]

150. I suspect that I could have found 18

But it still wouldn't have been as good.

I only used a one word search (Gardasil) to save time.

[trotsky]

151. LMAO

Too bad she's missing out on seeing her ass get handed right back to her. Projection city.

[cosmik debris]

152. She doesn't welcome differing opinions. n/t

[uppityperson]

138. you're back? no, you're gone again.

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[varkam]

139. Mmmm pizza tastes good!

:rofl:

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[trotsky]

128. That's a dishonest spin - plus you are agreeing with our old Health troll.

The obsession is NOT with censoring - as you absolutely LOVE to try and paint this. You know, you would go a long way toward helping things in here if you would stop from accusing others of censorship. Can I get that commitment from you?

I can only speak for myself, but what I demand is accuracy in information, along with some kind of statistical, experimental evidence. Is that irrational? I do not think what word means what you think it means.

[Why Syzygy]

129. Yes, you may.

The sooner this crap goes the way of the do-do, the better. I didn't choose sides. Have no history here, and I think you make a mistake trying to claim I "LOVE" anything. I love truth just as much as you.

There are those folks in all of DU. They are usually scattered about. When they show up in concentrations, I suspect "conspiracy". Does that make me a theorist? So be it.

As for making demands, may I get from you a commitment that demands are played on a case by case? If something is to be de-bunked, it must be allowed a vent.

Motives are often times not crystal clear. I try real hard not to assign them without either lots of historical exposure or follow up questioning. That might be a good agreement as well.

Forward? Is it important to you to have a viable Health forum?

edit: The response method has been irrational on all sides.

[trotsky]

130. I must apologize.

With all the recent name changes I got you confused with another Health regular who has been quite adamant in accusing others of "censorship" when they merely advocate accuracy and the scientific method. (Even invoking Nazi comparisons, which is always a great way to elevate the debate. :eyes:) However since you did express a similar sentiment, I do feel much of my post still applies.

There are those folks in all of DU. They are usually scattered about. When they show up in concentrations, I suspect "conspiracy".

Then your imagination is quite active. We're called skeptics, and we have this crazy idea that assertions should be backed up by evidence. We are no "clique," we are no "conspiracy," we're all just individuals who are fed up with the anti-science attitude of much of society and we all want to defend rational health and science policies.

may I get from you a commitment that demands are played on a case by case? If something is to be de-bunked, it must be allowed a vent.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. Can you elaborate?

[Why Syzygy]

133. ah. Well the confusion

would invalidate the request:
may I get from you a commitment that demands are played on a case by case? If something is to be de-bunked, it must be allowed a vent.

Case-by-case. Just asking not to make any assumptions based on the past going forward.
It seemed as if you were assuming I had the same agenda you oppose. But it wasn't 'me'.

Still, a fresh start is in order. Lots of people want to use the forum. As long as I have the energy, I will try to do my part to bring a fresh approach.

[HamdenRice]

131. Speak of the devil ! nt

[trotsky]

132. No kidding - I speak of an old troll, and you rear your head. n/t

[varkam]

134. It's only fitting. After all, he does know all.

Though probably not a man of wealth and taste.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

145. Hell, I got attacked for stating my C-section was necessary for me to live.

By another woman who is apparently an earth-mother-midwives-only-obstetricians-are-evil type.

I could not believe that a woman would believe that ALL babies can be turned so they come out vaginally, no matter how big they are, or how small mom's pelvis is, in the 21st century.

:wtf: :wtf: :grr: :nuke: :grr: :wtf: :banghead: :nuke:


I don't know why that is so hard for some women to understand. Furthermore, I am NOT a "failure" as a mother or a woman because of having a C-section.

It sure beats being dead, and having a dead child as well, to put it bluntly.