--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Don't know if you're still sparring with Skolnick > > > > over the TM page, but I thought you might at least > > > > get a chuckle out of this. Doesn't sound as though > > > > JAMA plans to have one of its news editors write a > > > > muckraking expose of these researchers, does it? > > > > > > > > July 13, 2006 > > > > Medical Journal Says It Was Again Misled > > > > By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS > > > > > > > > CHICAGO, July 12 For the second time in two months, The Journal > > of > > > > the American Medical Association says it was misled by > > researchers > > > > who failed to reveal financial ties to drug companies. > > > > > > > > The journal is tightening its policies for researchers as a > > result. > > > > > > Where have we heard this before? Ironically Andrew's been posting > > extensive stuff about > > > his JAMA expose in the Transcendental Meditation article under the > > guise of fair and > > > balanced. Wiki procedures don't reallly have any way of addressing > > this kind of thing, I > > > think, without escalating the matter to the highest levels, which > > is a tad silly (both the > > > requirement and actually doing somethige like that in this case). > > > > I was thinking that you might sneak in a mention > > of it in one of your back-and-forths with him > > about his JAMA expose, just to tweak his nose a > > little. > > > > It really is ironic. *Now* JAMA is tightening its > > policies... And these were actual *studies*, not > > puff pieces that mention a few studies in passing. > > > > I did already. I quoted his selective quoting of Chopra's book along with Jim Lippard's > respose "belongs in publication from Institute for Creation Research." He's gracefully > ignored it thus far...
Um, well, I meant mention the events described in the AP article and ask whether one of JAMA's news editors is writing a lengthy expose of the researchers and their institutions, and whether, when it's published, there will be a full-dress press conference, whether Andrew believes JAMA and the editor will get awards for the hit piece, etc., etc., etc. Then you might ask him why he thinks JAMA is *still* being bamboozled by researchers not revealing their financial connections after its terrible experience with Chopra & Co. showed it didn't do a good enough job of checking... And so on. There are lots of angles to it. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
