Medical reporters are destroying our knowledge about medicine

[Islander]

Jon Rappoport
August 22, 2012

As a medical investigative reporter for the past 30 years, I’ve found facts and connected dots. I’ve discovered that reporters in the mainstream are opposed to connecting dots. They won’t go there. They know they’ll be rejected by their editors and, if they persist, they’ll be demoted or fired. That’s the way the job works.

Mainstream reporters aren’t supposed to make inferences from facts. They’re supposed to solicit comments from “experts” on both sides of an issue and then slant the story toward the favored side.

This is especially true in the medical arena, which is a sacred cow. When editors want to restrain wandering medical reporters, they take them off hot stories and assign them something pedestrian.

Read more: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2...bout-medicine/

[Islander]

I like this excerpt:

"'On January 15, 2009, the NY Review of Books published a devastating quote from a woman who, for 20 years, edited the most prestigious medical journal in the world:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.'
"Marcia Angell, MD, 'Drug Companies and Doctors: A story of Corruption.' NY Review of Books, Jan. 15, 2009."

[Reesacat]

Excellent article — and it showcases the need to keep the freedom of the Internet to bypass media outlets that are bought and paid for by the drug companies...

[Islander]

Excellent point, Reesacat!

[mellowsong]

Fantastic article! Thanks for finding it Islander.

[highlander]

"Mainstream reporters aren’t supposed to make inferences from facts. They’re supposed to solicit comments from “experts” on both sides of an issue and then slant the story toward the favored side."

This is absolutely true. When working for newspapers if I stated anything unflattering, even if it was obvious, I had to directly quote a source or remove it. Automotive dealerships were the biggest advertisers in the last paper I worked for (they basically paid most of the bills) and I wrote for the automotive section doing car reviews. I had to be very careful not to be too critical of any car/truck. So what I did was brag on the good features, list the ok features and say absolutely nothing about some horrid feature. I always hoped my readers would notice the void. I drove some really crappy cars. It took me two days of thinking to come up with something good to say about one of them. I was starting to sweat. I'm sure it's the same with every other section of the paper. Honestly newspapers have become just wasted trees.

[Pattypans]

Fantastic article! Thanks for finding it Islander.

Ditto!

[bmc65]

Great Article. I like the quote about the main stream media. "They're not so much being phased out by the Internet; They're committing suicide".