• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Design of "Nootropics & Brain Enhancers" Area


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 Chip

  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 February 2005 - 01:13 AM


I believe now I see four threads that are fairly popular and subsequently near the top of the "Nootropics & Brain Enhancers" area http://www.imminst.o...s=&act=SF&f=169 that can be seen as inappropriate for the area.

Here are the one's that I think are largely missplaced:

http://www.imminst.o...f=169&t=5226&s=

http://www.imminst.o...f=169&t=5014&s=

http://www.imminst.o...f=169&t=5212&s=

"Another SMI2LE.BIZ horror story" http://www.imminst.o...f=169&t=4594&s=

Notice that they all have something similar, one could name names but that digresses from this attempt to find design flaws and suggest change. The one listed at the bottom predates the others and appears to be where the problem first became recognizable which eventually manifested in the other three threads. That's why I included its title as it is the one that needs to be considered to show up what if any forum design innovations might be made to keep the problem from continuuing to expand or to happen again.

I look in the current single thread entitled "Nootropic Sources Listings" at the top of the area under scrutiny http://www.imminst.o...T&f=169&t=99&s= I see that if one wanted to see what anyone posting there had to relate about any one supplier, it would require a lot of reading and there is no guarantee that the data would be there. Some folks have made some great postings there, valuable stuff that should not be lost and should be encouraged.

"Another SMI2LE.BIZ horror story" is discussion about experiences with a supplier, that is promoted on this site by someone making money from them, which needs to be seen and understood which meant it would not and was not proper to have been placed in that one long thread "Nootropic Sources Listings." The problem with Imminst.org seems to be the limitations placed on the coverage available concerning references to suppliers. Not only did the limitation of such coverage being relegated to one thread lead to such data going into the area on the substances themselves but it also left Imminst.org open to a situation where it might begin to appear the forum was misused for a vested interest. Without a specific and easy place (easier than just one thread at least) to post reviews and discussions on suppliers, people will be more gullible to special interest "click through" recommendations happening in the area about the substances themselves. There may be other reasons why the supplier should or should not be used and the vested interest not all that much of a concern but I am hereby looking for some other way for Imminst.org to avoid the problem, its escalation and reoccurence without using a "blame or fame" perspective as that seems too naive to come up with some lasting solution.

Sure there will always be discussion of suppliers in the area whose title suggests it is about the substances themselves but it appears to me that if there were a total new grouping (subheading?) where each supplier could be given its own thread, where general discussion and reviews of suppliers might also be offered its own expanding subcategory, it would do much to alleviate the current fiasco and avoid it in the future. I'm not familiar with the software from the owner's side of things but it appears to me that something similar to what I'm suggesting would be within its capabilities.

For what it's worth.

Chip

#2 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 February 2005 - 01:48 AM

Thanks Chip in fact you anticipated a request I was about to make to you. You mentioned being familiar with software for forums. We are interested in upgrading to provide some better features and help resolve some of the problems we are facing in a practical manner for organization. We have asked a couple of people to check out what is available.

Do you have any recommendations for forum software that have more flexible options?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 February 2005 - 02:00 AM

I am not really aware of the software. Thought I was only suggesting things that seemed possible with the current software. From the forums I have seen, I think Imminst.org is maybe using the best out there right now but I really don't know. I understand that this software used here undergoes continual updates so all I can suggest is to make sure Imminst.org has got the latest version.

As you can tell from other posts I've made I do not hold out ultimate hope for online forums and hope at least some of the functions they are used for now can eventually be moved to a purely client to client collaboration means. Online foums might be the best thing available to seek open public collaboration on things right now so attention should be made to use the existing options as well as possible for more fun times for all. ;)

#4 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 01 February 2005 - 02:05 AM

BTW I have not yet had a chance to say thank you for a number of suggestions you have made in a few areas that I think will be helpful Chip.

Thanks again for your interest and concern.

#5 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 February 2005 - 03:17 AM

Sorry if I somehow misled about my knowledge of forum software elsewhere here. My software experience is limited to a working knowledge of VB 6.0 and classes in Java and C#. I've used NetObjects Fusion, Frontpage and also used just straight html at one time to build a fairly complex retail site for a company that is now defunct, one of the dot com crash victims. I've used Access 2000 extensively. Think I should jump onto C# and MySQL with hopes of making or facilitating making the killer communication software. I've done a little work with SQL and I was impressed by the logic and utility and see that learning it should be valuable to my desires, same goes for UML. I've been a regular at yearly software development conferences here in Silicon Valley and hope to go to the next one. Oh, Python is proving valuable for writing P2P software, that's what Bit torrent is written in I believe. I've earned a pretty good overview of existing programming language potentials but forum software is an application, not the basic software. I think the forum software Imminst.org uses was written using C++

In the mean time, we's got to make do with what we's got or not. I know the above attempt at sharing observations and suggesting changes in the forum presentation design is not altogether simple and would take consideration and care and time to implement but maybe, it would be less time and hassle in the long run and maybe more good times for all. I don't know. All of these options are really quite recent and we are all experimenting.

Chip

#6 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 01 February 2005 - 07:13 PM

Let's see, it started with one misplaced thread. Not necessarily due to any intended malice but, I contend, a lacking of the current design of the layout of the forum. Then about a month and a half later another sprouted, this time from a person who was speaking for the management of this forum, an honest to goodness off-topic thread despite any kind of system patriotism spurred denial. Then another post cropped up shortly after the second. Then another popped up and a fifth. Then one was moved to the Free Speech area.

Now it appears that Nootropi has invoked at least one other that is purely spam and possibly many more but I am not really opening any more posts of his origin at least for a while. Not enough return for the effort.

People are blaming Nootropi. People are blaming the blamers. There is a classic positive feedback loop ocurring here. In systems science a positive feed back loop equates to an accelerating and expanding thrashing about of at least some aspects of the system that can bring great damage to other elements. There is a threat to the entire continuance of this forum or at least something that could result with the loss of great liberty and utility.

Bite the bullet. Admit the management sponsored thread was a part of the problem. Move it and the other off topic or obvious spam threads. Imminst.org is hemorrhaging. Remove the tumors from being in the presence of valued system functions. Move 'em to the Catcher.

Then take a break and do some deep breathing. Be conservative in judging what is off-category or spam but catch the new ones that will undoubtedly come, quick, and shuffle them off into the Catcher. This should buy everyone some time.

Then with that time and peace we all get, consider the nature of the problem carefully and make whatever design changes can be made to address minimizing that problem. Maybe you could offer a choice to apparent trouble makers, require a prominent signature designed by the management of the forum, maybe something like, "The management of Imminst.org finds the posts of this individual too often do not hold the best interests of the public" or have him face a one year expulsion. Have him carry it for a while with no other sig text or graphics and inform him he is being watched closely and more infractions against the smooth and helpful operation of the forum will be found grounds to ban him for, maybe try a month or so at first if minor and he works to correct his violence. If he goes about circumventing any of these requirements for continuing here, then ban him for a year making it his responsibility to contact you at that time if he wants to rejoin so it doesn't have to sit in some calendar except his own. Note I am not suggesting a permanent ban. Having the policy of permanent expulsion is being a hard ass. That is not a good marketing position. Be reasonable and the reasonable will come to love and support this forum.

My hope is that incorporating the long term strategy of "buying time" will help Imminst.org continue and expand with less stress to help us all buy some more time. Play our cards right and maybe that can be enough time for us to be immortal. I don't know if it is possible to become an immortal. I do suspect though, if there is a chance, those who get it will be those who take great care in how they handle information.

Seductive, no?

#7 nootropi

  • Guest
  • 1,207 posts
  • -3
  • Location:Arizona, Los Angles, San Diego, so many road

Posted 02 February 2005 - 01:14 AM

Moderators are trying to censor me. I am returning to deleting my posts, in sequential order (starting from the first posts to the newest).

That way you can have fun in this forum with your ill logic without my participation. ;)

If I am not permitted or "scolded" for calling out ignorance by its own name, I must take my thoughts with me. Thank you and take care. :-)

#8 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 02 February 2005 - 01:49 AM

Consider this a formal summons Nootropi.

You have had your account frozen due to your wanton destructive actions.

You do not own the threads you start after another poster contributes. Also as you are in the habit of altering and deleting posts to cover your abuses so all your account has simply been frozen pending a review and formal vote on what we shall do with you.

You precipitated this action by your inconsiderate and abusing behavior. You have every right to read your work but can no longer post or edit it until the leadership determines the best course of action in your case.

You have behaved in a childish and abusive manner. That others have behaved this way is simply no excuse and they too may be facing censure of some kind but also much of the posts are seized as evidence to be used in judgment of your case.

Consider that anything you say from this point forward can and will be used in deliberating against you and determining our response.

I am also putting all the nootropes forum on notice that this kind of action can be extended to others that have been violating the rules here.

Two wrongs simply do not make 'rights.'

#9 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 02 February 2005 - 02:05 AM

Lazarus,

Thank you very much.

Chip,

I confess I owe you an apology--I misjudged you.

#10 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 02 February 2005 - 07:57 PM

Thanks Scott. Guess you already got my apology ;)

Now that this thread has been moved to this area I hesitate to post in it because it really is not about nootropics or brain enhancers but I offer the following in hopes that there is better understanding of what I feel are some layout issues that could be addressed to minimize the potential for problems in the future.

I don't know how exactly but I do believe that an easy and utilitarian way for members to discuss and review and recommend suppliers of nootropics is what is lacking from this forum and that is what facilitated the problems that it recently experienced. Without a clear place to go to find this, the space was made for more dependence upon such talk within discussion of the substances themselves. Sure that is going to happen but without a formal place for such, more dependency exists for reccomendations to happen in a surreptitious manner, opening the door to people with a vested interest. We could call such people bad eggs who will go about pursuing their ends no matter what but to have conditions that foment bad behavior is something that one should consider lessening.

#11 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 02 February 2005 - 09:18 PM

On the contrary Chip go ahead and continue to post as it concerns the interested parties of this subject. In fact as long as everyone remains civil and contributes positively it only increases the odds the improvements will work.

#12 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 02 February 2005 - 10:20 PM

Chip,

1. Personally I don't see the need for frequent discussion of suppliers per se. There is the pinned topic:

Nootropic Sources Listings

which lifemirage updates once a year.

Beyond that there are three main bulk suppliers: one supurb service and product, one supurb service with a few questions about quality, and one....which if you have read anything on any of several forums and still order from...well you were warned.

2. The main question I have is what are you proposing to do with freqent threads which go like this:

Thread title: supplement x

Body: discussion of pros and cons of this stuff. Followed by the inevitable...

"anyone know who sells this?"

Followed by a few answers.

It is silly (IMHO) to interrupt the flow of this kind of thread and not let people discuss where to buy supps in the threads discussing the supps.

I doubt this will even be an issue with the people presently posting here. You could wait and see this for yourself. It would not matter much to me if you limited REVIEWS of the suppliers to...a place of your choosing as long as we are allowed to list the sources itself in the main thead.

Edited by scottl, 02 February 2005 - 10:53 PM.


#13 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 03 February 2005 - 01:25 AM

When I want to buy something one of the first places I go is http://www.pricegrabber.com and I pay special attention to the ratings that are associated with each store that comes up for items. This has resulted in good experiences for me, always balancing price and ratings before selecting a source. Appears there are virtually no ratings and no reviews entered for the sources that one can come up with for supplements. http://www.eopinions.com seems to not cover supplements at all. So here is an unfulfilled need that some how might become a decent service that some one or some web site could provide that would be a real traffic driver, a real value added service.

How could something like this be implemented within the software used for this forum? I speculated a bit on how that might happen in the first post of this thread. However, if what I was thinking about, a different thread for each possible provider within a "pinned" subject area above the area for discussion of the supplements themselves, it would make the page for the area covering nootropics and brain enhancers quite long and unwieldy. Add to that some how the option of seeking decent providers via a search of the substances and looks like it becomes more space filling, more impractical. If that undesirable characteristic of taking up too much space could somehow be avoided, it would help lessen the dependence on individual suggestions and reviews, making the search of a provider more of a scientific approach rather than anecdotal. Reliance on sporadic reviews and references within the subject area of the substances incorporates more bias and less ability at useful comparison. The danger that the reviews or suggestions might be tainted by vested interests continues and something like the problem that Imminst.org just experienced is subject to happening again.

Guess it is a real possibility that what I am thinking about here is a dead end. I am brought back to my strong evidence driven postulation that online forums are quite lacking the utility to avoid flaming noise and ill will. Feedback occurs where some one who at one time may have been quite a resourceful and sound source of intelligence degrades into babbling nonsense as I believe we just witnessed. Those who are subject to a "good guy verses bad guy" perspective can also suffer from the feedback to incorporate some of their own babbling and false speculations, more noise.

I like the idea of pursuing more organization in the hopes of requiring less enforcement, less policing, with less opportunity for the abuse of power that such can allow but online forum software may just not be up to the task. I haven't looked much at Avant's forum but, if I understand correctly, they are a provider which means they would not really want people to go about finding any sources other than themselves which may have been part of the reason why someone seeking to test suppliers would come to be an undesirable at such a site, especially if the tester tended to take criticism personally and resorted to flaming and spam.

Oh well. If any one can see a way to help people make wise choices more readily than what is happening now, it could be a valuable service and, in itself, a popularity as well as a revenue generator.

In the mean time, there is a lesson to be learned here. Nootropics and brain enhancers are no guarantee that the user can develop more intelligence. The hubris or over confidence that I believe I have seen amongst some users of nootropics, causing them to have too much confidence in their opinions, actually can result in the expression of less intelligence. There is no replacement for adopting a deep respect and desire to use sound information handling, the scientific method, in one's pursuits. Seek sound information handling techniques and you can continually increase your intelligence. Online forums with their dependence on linear, sequential posts, their top-down nature, may just not be all too conducive to pursuing the most trustworthy perspective.

In the mean time, there are posts in this area, threads, that really don't belong. They are obvious. One could wait for them to slip past the main page as more threads are created regarding the subject of the area but as long as they exist on the main page, there will be a tendency for more similar off-topic threads to arise.

I guess one could surmise that I have wasted time on this and the time of those who are following this thread. The lesson, that I believe I describe in the second paragraph above this one, is an important one. I do think that is worth cognizance at least.

Unless some one can add more enlightening data that makes some options available that I can not see presently, I'm going to leave this alone. Think I've thrashed it out as well as possible with the aid of Scott, who was the only one to attempt to help consider the subject of this thread. Thank you for your intelligent speculation Scott.

#14 vortexentity

  • Guest
  • 243 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Florida

Posted 03 February 2005 - 03:14 AM

There needs to be something like a suppliers due diligence board. I think the rather long and unending thread "Another Smi2le.biz horror story" was on the slanted side while it did give a lot of important information for members to view about potential abuse by suppliers that are promoted by certain other members.

Some formal structure would help to limit the need for one rambling thread on one supplier. I would think a due diligence board for nootropic and life extension products.

That is my take on the subject.

#15 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 03 February 2005 - 03:47 AM

these seem like great sugestions to me

#16 stellar

  • Guest
  • 366 posts
  • 2

Posted 03 February 2005 - 07:29 PM

You have had your account frozen due to your wanton destructive actions. 


Thank you for taking a stand, Lazarus. I know we can move forward without impediment now.....

Cheers to a new era at Imminst!!
[thumb] [thumb] [thumb] [thumb] [thumb]

#17 zg00

  • Guest
  • 82 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 February 2005 - 12:37 AM

There needs to be something like a suppliers due diligence board. I think the rather long and unending thread "Another Smi2le.biz horror story" was on the slanted side while it did give a lot of important information for members to view about potential abuse by suppliers that are promoted by certain other members.

Some formal structure would help to limit the need for one rambling thread on one supplier. I would think a due diligence board for nootropic and life extension products.

That is my take on the subject.


A moderator poll/thread would be the simplest way to accomplish this, without resorting to actually writing or heavily customizing an existing portal program.

You could try to do it with a wiki system by you wouldn't be able to (without customization) collect useful statistical data.

Anyone handy with PHP could create a PHPbb add-on that would do the trick (ie a registered users/single-vote/5-star-averaged system).

But since no-one seems to be PHP friendly, the moderated poll/thread would work. Would just require the poll be standardized (so every review contains the same options) and much more aggressive moderation (so the useful personal reviews attached to the thread don't get buried in petty tit-for-tat arguments). It obviously wouldn't be like a regular thread.

What do you ladies and gentlemen think?

#18 zg00

  • Guest
  • 82 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 February 2005 - 12:48 AM

Check out www.drugbuyers.com for an example of a forum (thread) based review system. They don't seem to implement the polling system but the threads seem to be fairly well laid out and are administrator moderated. With the poll for quick summarization and the user feedback further down the thread I think you have an acceptable review of the business and the customers experience (no, this site is obviously not focused on either nootropics or life extension, but it suits as an example).

CMOA Disclaimer: By posting this site I'm *not* encouraging anyone to do anything that might break any applicable local or regional laws, its just an example.

Heres a direct link:

http://www.drugbuyer.../0/Board/canexp

#19 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 04 February 2005 - 01:04 AM

Good I am glad to hear so many concerned members of the nootropes community weighing in.

Yes we intend to make the area moderated and I should add that a presentation of the case against certain individuals will be presented soon. One thing I think I should say though is that it is the understanding of many in leadership that anyone who is not a full member can be summarily banned but those who are full members have a right to a redress of their grievances.

I want to add that it is possible to make the discussion of suppliers a separate subject within nootropes and no one will mind so long as two conditions are met:

a: No fighting over the opinions, everybody has a right to theirs.
b: No business in the forums. If you want to talk to one another privately that is no concern of ours.

We are also concerned about another practice that has become too common. Stop practicing medicine with or without licenses, this is not the proper venue for such an exchange of information. If you are a professional already you should know better, if not you need to know this is illegal and extends liability to us that we are unwilling to support. Again please take it to a personal exchange of information on suspected diagnoses and suggested treatments if you have a serious concern for another's wellbeing or desperately want their opinion.

It is practices such as these that are making it difficult to support the entire forum, aside from the rancor and vitriol.

Lastly, aside from lowering the tone, no more personal art directed at satirizing other members, ever, no more personal *business* click through games and spamming and please use your signatures just for signatures.

I think it would be valuable to discuss openly all suppliers but I also want to emphasize this is not an offer to allow free advertising for these suppliers.

#20 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 February 2005 - 02:42 AM

Hey zq00, nice find. I didn't really drill down but it begins to look like what I've been thinking about. Cool.

Lazarus, I changed my sig. Back to saving the world by myself. Oh well.... [cry]

#21 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 04 February 2005 - 05:00 AM

We don't really object to someone posting an obvious link to their favorite website or personal web page. That is not really the concern, we have had trouble with some groups abusing this feature to spam others and embedding the links in images that function like banners with click throughs and that is not acceptable.

But you are correct there is no 'west' for da wabbit. [!;)]

#22 Chip

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 387 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 February 2005 - 05:29 AM

I do have a place on my web site for people to make donations but I don't stress it and I am definitely not a commercial concern. I am more interested in getting some feedback, some criticism. Usually I get the best results when I contact people personally. Last guy to offer me some helpful insight was Murray Turoff who has been involved with testing delphi systems and he referred me to some highly interesting data. I'm still waiting for a sociology professor to get back to me who expressed some intrigue and spent hours at my site.

That example zq00 found would still require a great deal of space to enact here, probably too much. If the space for threads about the substances themselves was made about half size maybe it would work and maybe the reviews section could be cut shorter too, just keeping the suppliers that seemed most popular showing with an obvious way to get to an archive of others. Seems like different application software there so the layout would probably be different here. One should look at zq00's link more carefully to see what the software is. This paragraph was partly entered to keep the post on topic.;)

I'm going to change my sig back. I'm just a basic member, thinking about becoming a full member but, I'm not really a joiner of causes. I have always preferred being a peasant. I guess it was DonSpanton who suggested I have an authority complex. I once became a senator of my college student body government and could have made a bid to become the president but turned it all down as I didn't exactly fit in and I was more interested in devoting time to my studies. Ended up being kind of railroaded out of my college town. I got to finish writing my memoirs. In some ways I've had a more adventurous life than Heinlein's Lazarus Long. Still waiting to lift off with fellow immortalists for a trip around the galaxy and I can hardly wait for my flying car with the tesseract compartment.

#23 zg00

  • Guest
  • 82 posts
  • 0

Posted 04 February 2005 - 07:27 AM

Good discussion(s) Chip, thanks.

#24 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 04 February 2005 - 09:22 AM

Lazarus,

I don't know where this question goes do I'll put it here since you mentioned it here.

"We are also concerned about another practice that has become too common. Stop practicing medicine with or without licenses, this is not the proper venue for such an exchange of information. If you are a professional already you should know better, if not you need to know this is illegal and extends liability to us that we are unwilling to support. Again please take it to a personal exchange of information on suspected diagnoses and suggested treatments if you have a serious concern for another's wellbeing or desperately want their opinion. "

"If you are a professional already you should know better, if not you need to know this is illegal "

Since I am the only physician (I am aware of) aside from (?) Lifemirage I assume this is directed at me. I disagree that anything I have posted on this forum is inappropriate, and certainly nothing has been illegal. It sounds like after ages of the imminst higherups allowing a former poster to post nootropic regimens which would be harmful to people's health (as section 8 has made you aware) you would not allow me to tell people to take extra vitamin C for a cold.

It is your forum.

1. If you think any of my previous posts have been inappropriate along these lines, please provide me with an example.

2. Please tell me exactly where you wish to draw the line?

As a seperate issue, it is very common on many forums for a poster to say I have disease x does anyone know anything helpful and people degreed or not say you might look into a, b or c or post an abstract with the results of A, B or C in this condition. Please provide me with the basis for your implication that this constitutes "practicing medicine".

Edited by scottl, 04 February 2005 - 12:47 PM.


#25 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 04 February 2005 - 12:39 PM

Since I am the only physician (I am aware of) aside from (?) Lifemirage I assume this is directed at me. I disagree that anything I have posted on this forum is inappropriate, and certainly nothing has been illegal. It sounds like after ages of the imminst higherups allowing a former poster to post nootropic regimens which would be harmful to people's health (as section 8 has made you aware) you would not allow me to tell people to extra vitamin C for a cold.


We were aware of the problem and in discussion about it even before Section 8 weighed in. We are developing policy on this not seeking to censure anyone.

Scott you are not the only physician and if I want to accuse you of something I will, privately before publicly. I intentionally made this abstract because I am not interested in arguing individual conduct but the rules for conduct.

As a separate issue. If a poster says I have disease x does anyone know anything helpful? and people degreed or not say you might look into a, b or c or post an abstract with the results of A, B or C in this condition (and this happens on every board I read). Please provide me with the basis for your implication that this constitutes "practicing medicine".


I do not think this is an appropriate venue or method to practice medicine. I am certainly not telling you as a physician that you can not give an individual you feel you are sufficiently familiar with advice. What is wrong with taking that step in private rather than in public?

There is a distinction between the diagnostic process and medical research.

Discussing disease symptoms and diagnoses in public can have a positive effect in the abstract when it helps an individual better recognize their own condition so as to seek additional help but when someone gives the personal advice in public it reverses the process by suggesting to people that have similar symptoms that they in fact might have the same diagnosis when it is false.

The patient needs to get personalized analysis to confirm all the specific symptoms, contraindications of suggested treatments, specific testing, and follow up on treatment. This process is undermined by collective treatment IHMO.

I have not asked you to change the past. I am asking everyone to pay attention to this conduct for the future. Policy is not meant to be 'personal.'

On some medical websites there are Q&A forums where physicians do perform some of what you suggest but they are medical websites to begin with and have liability coverage for this conduct as well as peer review of the proffered advice. We are simply not in the position to do that. What is wrong with making the personal advice private between you and the interested party through PM's and keeping the discussion of diagnoses, symptoms, and risks in the abstract?

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for BRAIN HEALTH to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#26 scottl

  • Guest
  • 2,177 posts
  • 2

Posted 04 February 2005 - 04:49 PM

Lazarus,

There is an important distinction that you are not making.

There are two issues:

A diagnosis and
B. treatment

You speak against any discussions of treatment in public posts but then back it up by discussing the diagnosis issue.

Doing any diagnosis over the net is perilous to put it mildly. I think all physicians would realize this. The issue of treatment is another issue entirely. Anyone with a computer who can find this forum can type their diagnosis into google and gets lots more (and more generic) adivise then I or anyone else is going to give someone in a reply. To think you can protect someone from reading about potential solutions by not alowing it to be discussed publicly is...silly. You can protect them from some of the obscure but effective solutions that I or someone else might post (and in that sense would possibly be contributing harm). And (still speaking strictly of treatment) for every person who asks this publicly, there are others who will not post.

To get back to the example I gave:

If a poster says I have disease x does anyone know anything helpful? and people degreed or not say you might look into a, b or c or post an abstract with the results of A, B or C in this condition (and this happens on every board I read).

I think you are hard pressed to call this practicing medicine (unless you think google is capable of such). OTOH I lack the...protecting people mindset [I'm stating this in the most...value neutral way I know how] and if you wish to be silly...I will abide by your rules. Just so you understand it from a medical point of view.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users