[Foundation-l] Misplaced Reliance, was Re: Paid editing, was Re: Ban and...

Mon Nov 1 19:13:21 UTC 2010

On 01/11/2010 18:40, Fred Bauder wrote:
>> Precisely my feeling on this. I just recently read that out of over 40
>> studies on something, only ~7 claimed they had no ill side effects (6 of
>> those being FDA tests). I don't remember where I saw it, but that is
>> basically how it was, I think. It is common knowledge that manufacture
>> funded research is much less critical, and sometimes the results are
>> totally
>> different from what the recipients experience. That is probably why
>> people
>> thought it would be bad-mouthing to say that the manufacture funded the
>> research.
>
>> From PLoS Medicine:
>
> "Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among
> Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles"
>
> http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0040005
>
> A slight change in emphasis but making the point.
>

Question what is your concerned about bullshit company PR and advertising?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVV3QQ3wjC8&feature=related

Why should that stuff be allowed to get into the articles in the first 
place?