|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Science & Skepticism » Skepticism, Science and Pseudoscience Group |
EvolveOrConvolve (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat May-09-09 08:06 PM Original message |
Why are woos allowed to advertise potentially dangerous treatments |
Refresh | 0 Recommendations | Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
uppityperson (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat May-09-09 11:52 PM Response to Original message |
1. I've alerted on GD ones, had them moved to Health forum. You make good points, will |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
EvolveOrConvolve (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 02:17 AM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Maybe that's the best way to go about it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
varkam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 12:19 AM Response to Original message |
2. My understanding is that Skinner et al want to take a pretty light touch when it comes to... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
EvolveOrConvolve (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 02:30 AM Response to Reply #2 |
5. And I absolutely agree with the free speed stuff wholeheartedly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
realisticphish (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 09:22 AM Response to Reply #5 |
7. that's a good point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
varkam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 07:41 PM Response to Reply #5 |
9. I agree with you that it's frustrating, but it isn't my position nor is it my call. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
semillama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-11-09 06:46 PM Response to Reply #9 |
12. Indeed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
mr blur (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-11-09 02:16 AM Response to Reply #5 |
10. Spot on. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
Orrex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 08:28 AM Response to Reply #2 |
6. The free speech argument is problematic, though |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
varkam (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 07:38 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. I agree, but with respect to this issue... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
TZ (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-11-09 08:25 AM Response to Reply #8 |
11. I think part of the problem is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-10-09 12:59 AM Response to Original message |
3. They aren't. Hit alert. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 09:00 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Science & Skepticism » Skepticism, Science and Pseudoscience Group |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC