|
|
||||
| Site Search | GHS Products | Privacy | Affiliates | Site Map | Contact Us | Home |
Are Shock Value Health Headlines Putting Your Health At Risk? |
Health
Matters
|
|
News Headlines! True or False? You would hope that newspaper companies like the large Gannett Newspaper chain, whose newspapers reach countless millions of readers, would make sure that their reporting is responsible, especially with regard to health issues that impact people’s lives. Unfortunately, I do not find that to be the case. What I find, instead, is sensationalist reporting with no regard to the damage it can do to the health of so many unsuspecting readers. Here are examples of two articles written two weeks apart, that received big play in the The Arizona Republic, a Gannett newspaper, which, I’m sure, given the by-lines, was published in Gannett newspapers around the country. Gannett is the publisher of the widely distributed USA Today for those of you who don’t know. The first article had the blazingly bold headline – Study can find no benefit in acupuncture for fibromyalgia. By Ron Todt, Associated Press I quote from the first paragraph. “Philadelphia --- Acupuncture proved no more effective than sham treatments for treating pain from a common chronic condition, according to a new study.” The story goes on and on telling how the study was run and reports that it was published in the July 5th Tuesday issue of Annals of Internal Medicine. “We did not find that acupuncture reduced pain in patients with fibromyalgia,” the study concluded. Researcher Dedra Buchwald said the results were a surprise, given stories and testimonials from fibromyalgia patients who say acupuncture helps. Then she says, in the very last paragraph of this good sized article, that acupuncturists generally tailor treatments for each patient and combine it with other forms of treatment, which cannot be done in a clinical trial! Is it a wonder then that patients given acupuncture treatments, combined with other treatments that were specifically tailored to them, benefited from these treatments and that those in Buchwald’s trial, with all test subjects given the limited treatment, did not? If Buchwald admits that acupuncture is always combined with other treatments and needs to be tailored to the patient, why would she run a trial using acupuncture alone which is obviously designed to fail from the start? Why didn’t she talk to acupuncturists about how to properly structure the test? Why didn’t she include a group of patients who were treated with treatments specifically designed for them as is the normal practice to be combined with acupuncture? Why did she structure a trial that was doomed to failure from the start? Was it because she wanted the trial to fail? To your good health and longevity, Ira Marxe Copyrighted © 2005 - All Rights Reserved
|
| Site Search | GHS Products | Privacy | Affiliates | Site Map | Contact Us | Home |
|
|
||||
|
Copyrighted
© 2001-2007 ~ All Rights Reserved ~ Sedona,
AZ, USA ~ 928-203-9700 ~ Contact
Us ~ Terms
of Use
GHS a.m.Plus™, GHS
p.m.Plus™, GHS Plus™,
GHS Health-Zymes™, GHS AntiOxidant Super Plus™,
GHS Rooibos Tea™,
Good Health Supplements™, Health Matters Minutes™ are trademarks of AntiAging Life Extension Dot Com, Inc. - Links |