SRL Archive - NOTA

Discuss whether publishers of health books should have a moral or legal obligation not to publish health books that are misleading or contain dangerous advice. What, if anything, should be done to discourage publishers who persist in publishing such books?

Currently it is legal in the US to print misleading or dangerous health/medical information as long as it is not directly said to be for profit.

From: Element17
Discuss whether publishers of health books should have a moral or legal obligation not to publish health books that are misleading or contain dangerous advice. What, if anything, should be done to discourage publishers who persist in publishing such books?

Currently it is legal in the US to print misleading or dangerous health/medical information as long as it is not directly said to be for profit.

Yes it should be illegal, I always hear some of my buddies telling me they are going to do some new dangerous method to lose weight etc.

For example the juice fast
People really think it helps them lose weight, but really it is meant for detoxing. Weight loss is a SIDE EFFECT, and generally a negative one because you will gain it back + some because of your now lowered metabolism (due to not consuming the same amount of calories you usually do).

From: R4nd0m
Yes it should be illegal, I always hear some of my buddies telling me they are going to do some new dangerous method to lose weight etc.

For example the juice fast
People really think it helps them lose weight, but really it is meant for detoxing. Weight loss is a SIDE EFFECT, and generally a negative one because you will gain it back + some because of your now lowered metabolism (due to not consuming the same amount of calories you usually do).

While I agree with you that it should be illegal, the reason that is isn't currently is because that would violate freedom of speech. Also, magazines and other publications need the money they get from running ads about products and there isn't enough time nor resources to investigate all of these medical claims and medicines. So, all this misleading information is getting published and passed around but whom is going to conduct the research to prove all these "breakthrough", supplements/weight loss pills/diets.

Another example is the Onion..the fake news station, they produce fake/funny news…should that be illegal because its not true? And the argument that people knows it false/fake wont work because the companies producing this misleading information could say its just a hox and they were never serious and if people believe it that is their fault. I also think people need to use some common sense when it comes to stuff like this. Like as your doctor about some of these "alternative" medicines. They don't know everything but they probably have better more reliable resources to check.

Should be legal. Who will you put in charge of what is legal and what is illegal? The government? Some big pharmaceutical company? I think you can't control the written word, and you shouldn't. Of course a book stating one should drink poison to loose weight should be banished from the bookstores. But, the poison should be well known and backed-up by multiple valid studies while non exist against it. As you will see, it is hard to call something unhealthy or bad. Controlling it will encourage a big money hoax like the scientist and al gore did with global warming.

From: Element17
While I agree with you that it should be illegal, the reason that is isn't currently is because that would violate freedom of speech. Also, magazines and other publications need the money they get from running ads about products and there isn't enough time nor resources to investigate all of these medical claims and medicines. So, all this misleading information is getting published and passed around but whom is going to conduct the research to prove all these "breakthrough", supplements/weight loss pills/diets.

Another example is the Onion..the fake news station, they produce fake/funny news…should that be illegal because its not true? And the argument that people knows it false/fake wont work because the companies producing this misleading information could say its just a hox and they were never serious and if people believe it that is their fault. I also think people need to use some common sense when it comes to stuff like this. Like as your doctor about some of these "alternative" medicines. They don't know everything but they probably have better more reliable resources to check.

The onion is satire, they brand it as satire. These medical companies that make these "new weight loss pills" don't brand it as unsafe, it should say in big red letters "THIS WILL MAKE YOU LOSE MONEY" haha. If a company wants to release a product that will be consumed they should be able to buy scientists to do the research. If people just asked their doctors we would not have a problem but I feel the general majority of America to be specific cannot afford a doctor or is ashamed to go to one.

From: masterBB
Should be legal. Who will you put in charge of what is legal and what is illegal? The government? Some big pharmaceutical company? I think you can't control the written word, and you shouldn't. Of course a book stating one should drink poison to loose weight should be banished from the bookstores. But, the poison should be well known and backed-up by multiple valid studies while non exist against it. As you will see, it is hard to call something unhealthy or bad. Controlling it will encourage a big money hoax like the scientist and al gore did with global warming.

Please tell me I read your post wrong, but it seems like you said climate change is a hoax. If I misunderstood your post please say.

From: BMWxi
Please tell me I read your post wrong, but it seems like you said climate change is a hoax. If I misunderstood your post please say.

I am not 100% sure about it. The ice that had melted revealed grass and plants that were there before. So it seems to have been hotter on earth not that long ago.

But that was not what I meant. At this moment they are building a new coal plant in the Netherlands. It is one of the most efficient ones ever made. With almost no CO2 output into the environment. Still a big part of the cost of building it was CO2 rights, more then 2.2 billion euros! That is a lot. A lot. And it is all wasted. It is one of the cleanest plants in the world, but we have to pay 2.2 Billion euros, I like to repeat that number. It is not sane! Big companies and governments are corrupt as hell for doing this, all because the al mighty All Gore wanted this.

I hear you masterBB, I would say it is unclear at best if global warming is happening as a direct result of CO2. (My opinion is that climate change is happening, but unsure of whether or not it is related to CO2).

As to the OP, unfortunately there is no one who we could trust to distinguish between fact and fiction, as masterBB has stated.

On the side topic of Global Warming. I believe there is no denying that the world is getting increasingly warm. What is arguable, is the % of it that is at fault of us, humans. And why does everyone view Global Warming as a absolutely terrible things. There are some upsides.

This was a question asked in my Consumer Health class.

Who would control what is true and not would be the research. For anything medical to accurate it must be test, data gathered and then replicated by other groups yielding the same result. Also, the research should be peer-reviewed by experts in the field. Making its illegal for publishers to print books on misleading information would cost more money than it is worth. There is just to much information being created and published and one can always screw the facts to read as they want.

A question raised through all of this is, why is it the governments responsibility to filter all of this information? As a consumer the term, Caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) comes into play. We all know there is false information out there and most often the things you read are misleading or half-true. Like everyone needs vitamins…that is completely false. Only a select few who take vitamins actually NEED them. Also when you read something on the internet or from a brochure look where you received it from. Is the information the company is presenting in their favor? Did the company hire researchers to do the research? Is this a credible medical source? Do they provide other medical information? Also, a lot of the "Breaking news medical stories" are generally half-truths. Poor research is conducted and the reports/news station is not a reliable sources of medical information and they are only taking what someone else said and then saying it again.

My personal stance on this: I think it should remain legal because it would cost more to try and fix the problem and there simply just isn't enough resources and the law states its legal as long as its soul purpose is not to make profit. If you think the magic pill on tv is really going to work…well then you deserve to lose your money. Also how could you rewrite the law to not conflict with freedom of speech?