There's a dark little secret about the "Medical Literature"

Bookmark this article.

Anyone who tells you that doctors have your best interest in mind, bring this up.

I know they do the best, for the most part, with what they have available to them. But, like most things, the game is rigged. Ask any healthcare professional what they think about this article. Hopefully they'll take it at face value.

Tx for posting!

for confirming what I already suspected...

they don't for the most part

if they did, they wouldn't prescribe all the unnecessary crap to patients - but they do

doctors are some of the worst people - they are good actors, but they give zero fucks whether you live well or not or die - as long as you pay

if they truly cared, they would see that they're pumping radiation into people and calling it treatment - disgusting

"open-access medical journal"

that is NOT medical literature. it is like claiming for profit universities are institutions of higher learning.

Everyone knows open access is junk. Medical Journals have something called "Impact Factors." The higher the Impact Factor, the more credible and noteworthy the journal. Publishing in an open journal is kind of like appearing in who's Who.

LOL... These online journals are defined as "medical literature" please show us actual information that says otherwise.

When an article gets listed on PubMed... guess what, it's in the medical literature.



The second poster speaks of "Impact Factor" and is correct. But that's no different from when a doctor gets his doctorate. They're still an M.D. for all legal purposes. Doesn't matter how good his/her education is. Rarely does that question come into play.

The journals that have a higher impact factor also take anywhere from 6 months to a year to actually publish your paper. A higher level of scrutiny takes place. But in the current world of medicine, that rarely makes economical sense. And when it does, derivatives of that paper will be published in online access journals.


Thank you for the good debate points.. I hope we can continue. This is important for everyone to understand imo.

I hear what you're saying.

Just know that with malpractice suits becoming common place, it's not easy for any doctor to make a stand. They have a massive debt to pay for their "education" and may have been backed into a corner. Their malpractice insurance is incredibly high these days.

I've had candid conversations with a number of doctors (over drinks, mind you). I think they are simply "going along to get along" for the most part. I don't condone that but I can't find the gull to tell them they are selling out. If I were in the same boat, I honestly don't know how I'd do... Would I fight at risk of everything or would I just shut up and take the salary? I couldn't answer that in all honesty unless I was in their shoes. I know what I'd like to think though.

Hey Op, Google Medicine and media Embargo.

Did you know that any medical study that is published

first has to be reviewed by both the Elite and leaders of a

country?


Google it Media Embargo/Medicine.

Hahaha, this is great, 5*s!

Herein lies the real problem--censured science.

We live in a scientific oligarchy.

5*

This is to do with publishing research raw research not peer reviewing it and agreeing or disagreeing with it.

What about the peer-review process?

Evaluating The Evaluators from Consumer Lab

same here. this article says that consumer labs takes money from supplement companies who it writes consumer reports about and practices a type of blackmail by giving poor reports for products and companies who haven't paid.

[link to healthwyze.org]

I agree. This is a perfect example of the value of discussion here on GLP!

The articles I've been involved in must not have touched on this "sensitive" issue. I'm amazed and appalled by what I just read about this. It goes against anything that peer-reviewed issues should be accountable for.

The papers I've worked on have indeed been published by JAMA publications... This "embargo" document is quite enlightening.
[link to media.jamanetwork.com]

The peer review process is a whole other story. Many online-access journals ask the "submitter" of the article for "peers" names and email addresses to recommend to review said content.

In fact they go a step further and will sometimes ask who "should not" be asked to review the content.

This certainly does not imply that all peer-reviews are suspect... But it should certainly bring to light that many should be highly suspect of real scrutiny. This is after all, a recent phenomenon.

It really works both ways, too.

Censure of some research if it poses a threat to the current industry quotient.

Publication of trash science if it props up the current industry quotient.

In other words, the game is rigged. Yes?
Play at your own risk.

This documentary catalogs how allopathic medicine established dominance in the early part of the 20th Century, and how natural medicines were arbitrarily banned from the medical profession, despite the basis of this decision being scientifically unsound. The wholesale transition from natural medicines to chemical ones was based on financial and political reasons, at the expense of the patients.

sadly in the time of the internet, ANYONE can start
journal, medical or otherwise and say anything on it.
Sorta like FoxNews in the field of journalism.

The American Medical system and MD's have ZERO credibility at this point, yet they charge your wallet as if they so. Arrogant, know-nothing LYING LOSERS who are poisoning the public.

I share your frustration. I'm not a doctor but I have worked in these procedures. There is a fundamental failure here.

If more people understood the procedure(s), more would take responsibility on how to deal with any ailment. The status quo is certainly not the final answer... As most things in life, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Much appreciated!
I just started watching and it looks interesting. Thanks!!!

Ever seen cannabis in a doctor's office? That should be enough to tell you what's up.

And you bring up a very good point!
Is alternative medicine ever accepted? So many cultures benefit from this, yet industrialized cultures do not... This can only come down to personal belief.

I for one, believe greatly in alternative medicines. Black cumin, coconut oil, Moringa... are just a few that have my attention. But without FDA approval, the mainstream will never bring them to light.

Just like finances... we're on our own to decide.

Also, if you ever make medical claims for anything, you will be held accountable. Another reason why you'll never see anyone speak up for what they learn. It's a real shame!

Sadly this may very well contain good information but it seems to be only subtext over imagery.

I know first hand that imagery can can shift the message... It's too bad really. The message gets lost in the drama. No matter which side of the argument.

Thank you for posting regardless, but in all honesty... I can't recommend it just for this reason.

We need people to use good judgement and not be taken by imagery.

I'm still watching but I would never expect anyone to have the same level of interest you and I may have in this.

Shocker: Medical Research Frequently Bogus

If you read research in a scientific or medical journal, especially one that is peer-reviewed, you know it is presented as accurately as possible, right? Researcher Daniele Fanelli of the University of Edinburgh decided to study the scientists doing the studies to see if she could find the answer

After conducting the first meta-analysis of surveys questioning scientists about their misbehavior behind the scenes -- notably, falsifying their research -- she came up with results that are nothing less than shocking. It turns out that researchers apparently alter or just plain make up data far more frequently than previously estimated. And the practice seems to be particularly high in medical and drug research.

Bogus science isn't new, of course. In recent years researcher Hwang Woo-Suk's stem-cell lines were shown to be fake and cancer researcher Jon Sudbo was outed for making up cancer trials. These and other examples have demonstrated that made-up research can be easy to publish, even in some of the top, prestigious journals.

more.... [link to www.organicconsumers.org (secure)]

I've witnessed this kind of thing first hand.

For the record, Meta analysis is defined as follows:
Meta-analysis is a statistical technique for combining the findings from independent studies. Meta-analysis is most often used to assess the clinical effectiveness of healthcare interventions; it does this by combining data from two or more randomised control trials.


In other words, they take past studies and normalize the results. You can imagine how cherry picking of facts could happen. Especially if one or more of those past studies were bogus. Many of these past studies could very well be included from the "online access journals" because that IS part of the medical literature.

Can you see where this is going?