It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A Senate Finance Committee investigation has revealed that Medtronic Inc., the world's largest medical device manufacturer, actively engaged in deception and fraud concerning the marketing of its bone graft device InFuse. According to reports, Medtronic secretly hired private consultants to write and edit phony medical journal articles about the $800 million-a-year device, which was meant to give the illusion that these articles were written by independent scientists and physicians.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by kurius
So let me use your logic. One black man is caught using crack, every black man is a crack head? One white man is caught hitting his wife, every white man is a wifebeater? One latino is illegal, all latinos are illegals?
Just so you know, it's very easy to find who wrote the articles, as they are named in the article. What journals were these posted in? What peer review process was used?
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Kurius
So you bite one apple and it's rotten inside, so you decide all apples are rotten? Your analogy. See how stupid that is?
Now if your life depends on the apple, I would probably cut it up and look deep into the core of the apple before biting. If my life depends on a research paper I would dissect that just as deeply. Your using this one example to cover all research articles is beyond ridiculous .. in fact, there's a research term for it ....
Originally posted by Kurius
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Kurius
So you bite one apple and it's rotten inside, so you decide all apples are rotten? Your analogy. See how stupid that is?
Now if your life depends on the apple, I would probably cut it up and look deep into the core of the apple before biting. If my life depends on a research paper I would dissect that just as deeply. Your using this one example to cover all research articles is beyond ridiculous .. in fact, there's a research term for it ....
I think you are getting the idea....Yes. you should cut the apples.... smart boy! I didn't say all apples in the basket are rotten, did I? That's just silly...to the core.
It is never ridiculous to be careful and check your facts....Unless you are part of an organization that would benefit from people taking all research papers at face value, I think you would agree. Hmmmm....are you?
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Originally posted by Kurius
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Kurius
So you bite one apple and it's rotten inside, so you decide all apples are rotten? Your analogy. See how stupid that is?
Now if your life depends on the apple, I would probably cut it up and look deep into the core of the apple before biting. If my life depends on a research paper I would dissect that just as deeply. Your using this one example to cover all research articles is beyond ridiculous .. in fact, there's a research term for it ....
I think you are getting the idea....Yes. you should cut the apples.... smart boy! I didn't say all apples in the basket are rotten, did I? That's just silly...to the core.
It is never ridiculous to be careful and check your facts....Unless you are part of an organization that would benefit from people taking all research papers at face value, I think you would agree. Hmmmm....are you?
Smart boy? If you think talking condescendingly to your mental superiors somehow enhances your posts you're wrong.
And remember, with one that's caught there are probably many more that got away and still are getting away. So thread carefully...
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Kurius
I'm in my 30's, college educated, graduated top of my class as a member of the national honor society in my major, have a genius IQ, and have a professional job. Not that any of that matters which is why I only bring it up in response to your ridiculous claims once again assaulting me and my character in order to puff your post.
Smart boy is not an expression of elation. It's clearly condescending. My temper has been very calm, exposing your faulty logic is not indicative of my temper. I grasped your meaning quite well. You on the other hand said my analogies were bad, and then used an analogy that closely resembled my own. While you claim to not be casting aspersions on scientific studies as a whole ....
And remember, with one that's caught there are probably many more that got away and still are getting away. So thread carefully...
... you sure seem to be doing just that.
edit on 31-8-2013 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Pardon?
You mustn't discount that if a physician doesn't accept a particular study, he (she) will challenge it in depth sometimes to the point of commissioning a rival study.
That's the whole basis of science.
If you accept something without question then you're not being scientific.
Originally posted by KuriusIQ of a genius? Really? Don't try to pull my leg, man...Which test did you take?
Ok please dissect the sentence you pulled out....
"And remember, with one that's caught there are probably many more that got away and still are getting away. So thread carefully... "
Which part does it (even remotely) suggest to discard all scientific studies again, genius?
Originally posted by Pardon?
When I saw the title of this thread I immediately thought "Medtronic".
I used to work in the medical device industry a few years ago and it was pretty common for them to try to put pressure on physicians etc to produce the "right results" for them.
The ones that I knew all resisted but obviously from the article some didn't which is very unfortunate.
Bear in mind that this happened three years ago and reporting protocols have been severely tightened since then.
What people have to realise though is that even though a study states a conclusion, this does not necessarily mean that other physicians will take that as gospel. Indeed, when I used to present new findings to prospective customers I always was asked to provide extra proof than that which was in the "pilot" study. I was always asked who else was using it and what their experiences were (naturally, as soon as I left, the physician would be on the phone to that clinic!).
You mustn't discount that if a physician doesn't accept a particular study, he (she) will challenge it in depth sometimes to the point of commissioning a rival study.
That's the whole basis of science.
If you accept something without question then you're not being scientific.