MB Civic

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 27th, 2013 at 11:13 AM and filed under Food-related, Health. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.

One Response to “Left-leaning Alternet wildly discredits itself by headlining vitamin doomsday propaganda from vaccine pusher Paul Offit”

1. Ian Alterman said:

   Here we go again.

   I find the NN article quite amusing in its absurdity. First, suggesting that the AlterNet article is not based on sound science, is hopelessly biased, the writer is a shill for Big Pharma, etc. is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black, given that NN and Mike Adams are widely considered among the LEAST reliable sources of REAL science (as opposed to junk science and pseudo-science) on the Internet.

   Indeed, it is clear from the title of his article that Adams is simply annoyed that Paul Offit – Adams’ “nemesis” re his continued, and thoroughly debunked, claims re vaccines and autism – is featured in the AlterNet article. Indeed, his fury is shown in the fact that he didn’t even read the article correctly.

   For example, re his support of a claim that “the AMA and its members are owned by the pharmaceutical giants,” he clearly missed the following from the AlterNet article: “As recently as 2002, the Journal of the American Medical Association recommended that ‘all adults take one multivitamin daily.'” Thus, the AMA generally SUPPORTS vitamin use. As the article also points out, Big Pharma already owns some, if not many, of the largest vitamin companies, and is buying up others.

   As for the science, there is little in the AlterNet article that is debatable to anyone who has even the most rudimentary understanding of biology and nutrition. Any nutritionist, doctor, biologist or chemist will tell you that you CAN “overdose” on vitamins and minerals (i.e., take far more than your body can absorb), and that this COULD lead to damage to one’s health – including, possibly, shortening one’s lifespan. This is not “irrational fear” or “doomsday” thinking (as Adams – a notorious doomsday thinker himself – would have it); it is based on hard science.

   I could parse Adams’ entire article, but I will refrain from doing so. Although I am no fan of Big Pharma, I will simply note that Adams’ article is unsurprising given his own predilections for cherry-picked (junk) science (including his claimed “overwhelming body of scientific evidence supporting the benefits of supplemental nutrition” – which is neither “overwhelming” nor, in some cases, supportable), “irrational fear” (he claims that AlterNet is “opposed to sensible nutritional supplementation” – but that is simply not a rational take-away from the actual article), and egomania (he says, “I’ve got nothing whatsoever against [AlterNet] and I’ve actually sourced it many times in the past” – of course, but only when they agree with him!). As an aside, it is also not surprising that Adams cherry-picks the comments that he includes with his article; i.e., lifting only those that support his extremist views.

   It is worth noting here that NN and Adams do not have a particularly good reputation, even in the skeptical community. Here is what Wiki says about them: “NaturalNews is a website dedicated to alternative medicine and various conspiracy theories, such as chemtrails, the alleged dangers of fluoride in drinking water…and alleged health problems caused by ‘toxic’ ingredients in vaccines, including the now-discredited link to autism…The site has been called ‘the most blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet,’ and ‘a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable. If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the ‘natural’ products he hawks on his site.” Even the Skeptic’s Dictionary says, “Natural News is not a very good source for information. If you don’t trust me on this, go to Respectful Insolence or any of the other bloggers on ScienceBlogs and do a search for ‘Natural News’ or ‘Mike Adams’…Hundreds of entries will be found and not one of them will have a good word to say about Mike Adams as a source.”

   That NN continues to be a regular source for articles (or responses to articles) on Civic does not surprise me, simply because most people’s actual knowledge and understanding of SCIENCE – with a capital “S” and capital all other letters (LOL) – is sadly weak. What I DO fund surprising is that some of the same people who accept anthropogenic climate change – i.e., who accept that the overwhelming (in this case unquestionably so) scientific evidence supports ACC, and that climate change deniers are not only wrong but “harmful” – fail to make the same connection re vaccines and autism (where the OVERWHELMING scientific evidence does NOT support a connection) and other crackpot theories that Adams and NN purport, but that REAL science – i.e., where the scientific method is applied, and/or where randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and peer-reviewed scientific papers are involved – has thoroughly debunked.

   Peace.

   Posted on 27-Jun-13 at 2:01 pm | Permalink