I don't know anything about it, don't recall anyone chatting about it. Let's call some other skeptic MDs too: @gorskon @palmd @HHSkepDoc @ScienceBasedMed @SBMPediatrics Anyone know what this is about? Science based?
-
-
Replying to @mem_somerville @AtlanticJon and
It has all the hallmarks of a medical fraud- testimonials without citations to data, claims based on unvalidated theory...
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @DrDan_Biotech @SBMPediatrics and
Also, it's named after someone, which seems to be a big "tell" for quackery.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @cantab_biker @DrDan_Biotech and
Nope. It works. It's amazing. Loads of video testimonials from patients.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @SBMPediatrics @cantab_biker and
Saw that. Just because some guy writes an article on something he doesn't believe in, never having tried it, means nothing. I suspect a drug company paid the guy to write it. Thousands off the meds....big pharma loses money. This article appears..... connect the dots.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HollyGo55 @SBMPediatrics and
Saying “connect the dots” is functionally identical to saying “there is no connection between these things that I can draw myself, but I feel like there should be”
3 replies 4 retweets 29 likes -
Replying to @fMRI_guy @SBMPediatrics and
RA is big bucks for pharma companies. A guy has a programme that has people off their meds. Then an article is written with zero factual basis saying the programme doesn't work...but never interviewed Paddison or anyone on his programme. That's dots to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @fMRI_guy @HollyGo55 and
No, it's not fair in the least. You assume that Holly is correct that my post was "without zero factual basis" and that her criticism is anything more than an obvious ad hominem of the pharma shill variety. I don't need to interview Paddison to conclude his program is unproven.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
In addition, Paddison contacted me after my post went live. Suffice to say that I don't think he would want me to publish our email exchange, as he was as unable as Holly to provide compelling evidence that his protocol works. Just the same old anecdotes.
-
-
You’d think someone who think it works would have more than testimonials to counter a detailed, referenced post explaining the problems with the program. She can certainly provide whatever evidence she has. Testimonials aren’t very good as evidence.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Especially for a disease like rheumatoid arthritis, whose course naturally waxes and wanes.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.