Article writers - just stop before you kill somebody!

[Creative Thinker]

Information has become cheap. Only the internet is to be blamed.

[epsilon97]

I think that Internet marketers should stay out of the medical niche, unless you are a skilled doctor or other practitioner. I know that the health niche is lucrative, but it is not ethical to fake your expertise. People who are suffering from a serious medical condition can become desperate due to fear. They might not be in the proper state of mind to decipher between bull**** and actual medical advice.

I think that people get so wrapped up in making money online that they forget about their morals.

[Debbie Allen]

Good writing always starts with good research. In fact, that is where the majority of time is (should be) focused during a writing project.

But I do understand that even a well-researched article could provide information that is questionable - after all, the world is constantly changing and we learn and develop new things everyday - medical advances are being made daily - whether we are talking about alternative medicine or not.

I love the idea of a disclaimer for articles - just like we add to our sites and our products. But I doubt that the person that would blindly follow the advice of an article would bother to take much notice of a disclaimer.

Perhaps article directories should have a blanket disclaimer that reminds readers that the article content contained there should be used at their own risk - whether the article focuses on a gardening technique, a money-making concept, or a health related issue. Just a thought......

Obviously some writers are more concerned with getting an article out than in producing quality content that can help someone. This sort of goes back to the idea that anyone can be a writer. Yes, anyone can write to a degree, but not everyone is willing to put in the effort required to learn how to create quality content. After there is a full understanding of what is required to create an article that is based on research and that is also reader friendly, many 'writers' decide taking shortcuts is the quickest way to profits. Sadly, many marketers feed this cycle by hiring such writers and continuing to use their work.

[funky_budha]

as the saying goes, 'little information can kill you', my only take on this is to be careful what you read in the internet, because not all comes from an expert. and when it comes to health, i only trust doctors.

[dferrara]

My guess is the guy who put it out probably didn't even read the article. With so many plr articles out there a lot of people are just blasting them out as fast as they can without even reading what they say.

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by epsilon97

I think that Internet marketers should stay out of the medical niche, unless you are a skilled doctor or other practitioner. I know that the health niche is lucrative, but it is not ethical to fake your expertise. People who are suffering from a serious medical condition can become desperate due to fear. They might not be in the proper state of mind to decipher between bull**** and actual medical advice.

I think that people get so wrapped up in making money online that they forget about their morals.

What about weight loss?

Do you have to have lost 200 pounds before you can tell someone else about diets.

What about making money online?

Do you have to be and have made a million online before you advise others?

What about gambling?

Do you have to have broke the bank at Las Vegas before you tell someone about gambling tips?

What about looking after cats and dogs?

Do you have to be an expert in cats and dogs before you can research and write about them?

What about selling golf tips?

Do you have to have won the US or British open before you can offer advice?

Interesting isn't it?

And don't just reply by saying "well you are not dealing with life and death in those situations".

Bullsh*t.

Some licenced doctors have been known to literally murder their patients, so don't go saying they know everything etc.

In life buyer beware and on the internet reader beware.

Don't go down the road of stifling information just because you or anyone else thinks it's garbage.

Some people think Jesus didn't even exist, or allah was a killer or we never went to the moon, or aliens are amongst us or whatever.

NO ONE can choose how information should be controlled or used etc.

It is up to the person to be intelligent enough to apply common sense.

Also when you say people get desperate when close to death and will do anything to save themselves etc, then what is wrong with that.

I know of many people who were more deperate after some failed medical intervention and had no alternative but to try an alternative approach.

I could locate many articles where it suggests it's normal to have your stomach removed or colon shortened or have a gastric band fitted etc. etc.. How responsible is that? Yet they were written by "medically qualified" people.

I also know many people who have been helped by the medical profession, but don't assume you know which is best or what ought to be stamped out!

Sam

[Leron Ford]

I think we're at a point where we really have to be careful. If we can't show an ability to police ourselves, believe me, there is someone out there more than willing to do it for us.

All you have to do is look at the banking industry. If we keep going down the path we are going, we will be next, without a doubt.

That's my $0.02.

[HeySal]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

You don't think advising somebody to discontinue seeing their doctor when they have a life threatening condition is irresponsible?

<semiofftopicrant>
Actually - as a survivor I think it is the best advice to be given. </semiofftopicrant>

<ON TOPIC>
BUT..........I believe that advice is ILLEGAL. Any medical advice not given by a licensed physician or other officially approved individual or organization MUST be accompanied by a disclaimer whether it is a proven method or not.
It is also ILLEGAL to claim anything is a "cure" unless it is a pharmaceutically registered drug.

So the problem isn't always that the author has bad advice - it is a problem that they can get slammed with a lawsuit mighty fast if they don't cover their butts. The guy who wrote to "quit seeing a physician" could just wind up with a lawyer at his door no matter how sound his advice was or wasn't.
</ON TOPIC>

[megaresp]

Originally Posted by Nightengale

I cannot imagine someone giving such bad advice. That's sooo frightening! Did the author use their own name for the byline? Somebody ought to report them and get the articles taken down STAT.

There is an entire community of people that spend most of their days fighting claims just like this. Those of a skeptical persuasion refer to it as 'woo'.

An article or ad that advises people to stop seeing their doctor, and to use X instead, is giving medical advice. And that's illegal in the civilised world.

[geolt7]

It is a sad thing but true. There are those who just writes for the sake of writing and getting that few dollars for an article. It has become a mechanical process for many who do it the "production line" style.

[ScottTMc]

God, people actually do that?

Yet... most 'normal' people will proberbly see it as a completly stupid thing to do

[Liam Hamer]

Not only can article marketers be a danger to others, they can be a danger to themselves too - specifically those who write 700 articles a week

[itcoll]

its high time EZA started using disclaimers in their web site - or are they already using it?

[drwhogoesthere]

There is little we can do to stop other from doing the wrong thing. No matter how honest or accurate we maybe, there will always be somebody willing to take advantage of the system.

All suggest is that when you write make sure it is something you are proud of and willing to promote.

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by TMG Enterprises

This is true. I never said it was ethical of the writer to do it because it's deplorable. I just think that people have to take a certain amount of responsibility on their own shoulders.

Tina G

People have all different levels of intelligence and some that are less endowed with intelligence than others are easily duped. They believe or want to believe anything that is written or typed. That's pretty much why the FTC has to mess in the IM and advertising business to start with. Lack of ethics in promoting products ... information that can rob you of your money and even your health.

[glide21]

Let's face it, that is how this whole industry is perceived right now. IM are now the new used car salesmen or Estate agents in the UK.

[tomw]

Let's be honest here, the overwhelming majority of articles on directories and other forms of social spam sites are rehashed nonsense cobbled together from other rehashed nonsense found across the web and posted purely for the purpose of driving a click.

The sooner Google and the rest de-index those sites the better.

The web will then deliver a much more useful user experience to all.

Tom

[glide21]

.... and in the case of IM, preferrably a product you've used yourself and are happy with. There cannot be long lasting success thru cheating and lying, the universe simply doesn't work that way. Even Madoff finally got it

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by TelegramSam

In life buyer beware and on the internet reader beware.

NO ONE can choose how information should be controlled or used etc.

The FTC can and does control how information is used and it's advertiser beware.

[jrrich814]

I'm going to have to go with Russ here. Many of the articles you see on the various repositories are pure, unadulterated C**p!

The article directories themselves have all these "Terms of Service" that the writers are supposed to follow, but it seems as though those rules are only for legal disputes in case something untoward happens and a court battle ensues.

Poorly written - and often misleading - articles seem to be the rule-of-the-day.

Every new marketer coming down the pike gets told that they just need to put out a few (thousand) rehashed articles about their niche, and their fortune is assured. They don't know or care that the information they're spewing is not only worthless, it might even be devastating to someone who happens by and believes it.

I can understand that the article directories themselves are absolutely overloaded with trying to review everything that gets submitted to them for publication. It's a truly Herculean task, to be sure!

But, people simply can't be protected from themselves. We all need to perform reasonable "due diligence' on information gleaned from any electronic media -be that Internet, television, or even instant messaging!

Especially if that information relates to our or our families health!

--JR

[glide21]

To expect Google and others to police the web is even worse than allowing these spammers. The web is already becoming Google, just as pc software became Microsoft, this can't be good for anyone long term.

[tomw]

Originally Posted by glide21

To expect Google and others to police the web is even worse than allowing these spammers. The web is already becoming Google, just as pc software became Microsoft, this can't be good for anyone long term.

Since Google and other search engines exist to return SERPs that are both relevant *and* useful I have to disagree. Users perform searches with these tools in order to find specific information on the things they are specifically looking for.

The search engine side of Google, for instance, seeks to create the best possible system for doing this and it's in their best interests (as well as users') to de-index, or through their algorithms never index, useless or misleading content.

To use Russ' example;

Should I require some information on cancer, the obvious and natural SERP should provide me with a list of genuine medical sites containing genuine medical advice from genuine medical practitioners.

Why should I expect anything else?

What I am entitled *not* to expect is a list of links to rehashed nonsense dreamt up by "Bum" (or any other) marketers deliberately attempting to profit from diverting my attention from what I originally sought and drive me to sign up for their list, earn them an affiliate commission or buy their questionable info product on the subject.

If I wanted to buy, for example, a book about cancer I would have searched for one.

The web is full of ways to make money, and most of them make a lot more than tactics that ultimately annoy users, waste their time and deliver little of value.

If you want to make a few bucks from annoying users, wasting their time and delivering *nothing* of value to them, set up Adsense sites based on high paying keywords.

But that's a whole other conversation...



Tom

[scrofford]

Originally Posted by Sven Schoene

Interesting thread, Russ. Posting stuff like that for a quick buck is so wrong.


Actually, a lot of these bum marketers are submitting pure crap (which might even be spun with an article spinner a hundred times) over and over to these directories and to countless spam-blogs.


Sorry, but if you do not provide unique value you do not deserve the money. This opinion might be rather unpopular around here for some people but I don't care. A lot of these SEO techniques are nothing other than pure spam and contribute zero value to the world. That sucks.

And this is why I don't try to write 700 articles in a week or respin my stuff over and over....

[scrofford]

Originally Posted by TelegramSam

I understand what you are saying, but who are you to judge what is valid information and what isn't, especially in the field you mentioned?

Because you can tell what is usually CRAP and what isn't! And why would anyone listen to some article writer instead of their CANCER Doctor?

[scrofford]

Originally Posted by TelegramSam

Why does this thread look like it is turning into a bashing of natural health?

Listen guys, there is a lot of junk on the internet for sure.

But don't tar everyone with the same brush.

Many, many thousands of people die each year from wrong diagnosis by doctors, wrongly prescribed drugs, "correctly" prescribed drugs, operations that didn't work, "complications" in surgery etc. etc. etc.

Yes there is a lot of quackery.

There is also a lot of legalised quackery. "Oh, just take this vioxx. It'll handle the problem".

"It's not working as well as I hoped for you so just take an extra couple of prozacs."

Don't f****** get me started.

If you want to talk about dangerous articles, why not talk about all the bull**** IM'ers, no doubt some of whom are active on this forum, that promise to make you and I and everyone else rich overnight with no effort!!!

Sam

It's not about "bashing" natural health....It's bashing CRAP articles that people write and try to get people to listen to no matter which niche or business you are in.

[scrofford]

Originally Posted by tomw

What I am entitled *not* to expect is a list of links to rehashed nonsense dreamt up by "Bum" (or any other) marketers deliberately attempting to profit from diverting my attention from what I originally sought and driving me to sign up for their list, earn them an affiliate commission or buy their questionable info product on the subject.

If I wanted to buy, for example, a book about cancer I would have searched for one.

The web is full of ways to make money, and most of them make a lot more than tactics that ultimately annoy users, waste their time and deliver little of value.

If you want to make a few bucks from annoying users, wasting their time and delivering *nothing* of value to them, set up Adsense sites based on high paying keywords.

But that's a whole other conversation...



Tom

Exactly my point. I should be able to expect quality articles...not rehashed CRAP just so someone can get their link up in an article directory.

[Sumit Menon]

Freelance writing in the health niche should be banned! No, seriously.

[DAS_Matt]

Hmmm.. alternative medicine is a big niche I imagine. Take the cancer example of the OP. There are people out there who want nothing to do with chemo and the ravages it puts on the body and prefer alternative medicine. Why should their wishes be ignored for looking for alternative treatments? Things aren't just black and white here folks. Could it be done a better way in that article? Sure, it certainly could. I don't think aletrnative medicines should totally diss mainstream medicine but at the same time I don't think people should dismiss alternative medicine out of hand either.

[Robyn8243]

I agree that people should be extremely careful about what they write when it comes to any issues of health. You definitely should not just make stuff up looking to get paid.

Advising people you don't know (anyone reading an article online) to stop seeking help from their medical doctor is wrong. Nobody can be qualified to tell random people that they are not getting proper medical attention.

That said, there are many conditions that are not currently being adequately addressed by the traditional medical community, and people should be free to conduct their own research into alternatives and make their own informed choices. Why do people assume that anyone who makes an alternative choice is stupid?

I think it is healthy practice to question whether our medical providers have the best answers for our situation. Doctors do not always have all the answers.

I laugh every time I see some diet that has the CYA disclaimer to consult your physician before starting this or any other diet. Most medical doctors spend 50 minutes or less in their entire medical school education on nutrition. If you shop in a local supermarket and peek at the magazines (not counting National Inquirer) while you are waiting to pay, there is a very good chance that you know more about nutrition than your doctor. Yes, I know that some doctors are finally realizing the role that food plays in our health...but it is not something that is part of their education and the majority remain clueless.

When it comes to Cancer which many have mentioned, there are certain cancers that respond well to traditional treatments, but others have dismal almost nonexistent success rates through traditional treatments.

Having watched many people suffer through traditional treatment where the treatment is worse than the disease and death is inevitable...I think people should be free to pursue whatever "hail Mary" treatments that might work that they choose.

For every horror story anyone can tell about someone giving up on traditional treatment and dying after trying what some people think is quackery whether vitamins or any other treatment, there will be someone else with a horror story of someone sticking with traditional treatment and dying without ever trying a nontraditional treatment that others had success with.

Robyn

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by Robyn8243

That said, there are many conditions that are not currently being adequately addressed by the traditional medical community, and people should be free to conduct their own research into alternatives and make their own informed choices. Why do people assume that anyone who makes an alternative choice is stupid?

I think it is healthy practice to question whether our medical providers have the best answers for our situation. Doctors do not always have all the answers. Robyn

Whether conventional medicine or alternative medicine, affiliate marketers who are looking for the next buck to pocket are not authorities on medical treatment. They are selling cheesy clickbank products or other info products... being sold to sick and desperate people looking for some hope. This kind of affiliate marketing is why affiliate marketers have a bad reputation.

[Lance K]

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Whether conventional medicine or alternative medicine, affiliate marketers who are looking for the next buck to pocket are not authorities on medical treatment.

Regardless of niche, affiliate marketers who are looking for the next buck to pocket are not authorities. They're salespeople. In most cases, there's nothing wrong with being a straigh affiliate salesperson. But unless you're well versed in what you're selling, your results won't be optimal.

Affiliate marketers who are authorities on their subject care more about sharing their expertise than where there next dollar is coming from. The dollars are a by-product of their sharing.

I'm not saying all affiliate marketers need to be authorities. Just pointing out some differences in the two approaches.

[Robyn8243]

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Whether conventional medicine or alternative medicine, affiliate marketers who are looking for the next buck to pocket are not authorities on medical treatment. They are selling cheesy clickbank products or other info products... being sold to sick and desperate people looking for some hope. This kind of affiliate marketing is why affiliate marketers have a bad reputation.

Absolutely...I agree!

Every social site out there should have big disclaimers telling people that there is no filtering of information and that all the information is just somebody's opinion...no better than asking the opinion of your local hairdresser or bartender (probably worse because there is likely to be a financial motive for writing). Maybe give up some of their adsense spots to make it clear...not likely unless they are forced.

Those of us in this forum know better than to believe anything we read on EA or Squidoo or any other social site, because we know that more than likely there is an agenda behind it.

Robyn

[wirelessgeek]

No kidding! When I take on a job, I always tell the client, "I'll turn out content for you but I am NOT going to spin out more hype than information!" It's for the sake of ethics more than anything; if the guy wants to get sued for making false claims, that's his deal but I won't help him do it.

[ninja newbie]

I have to agree that there is some real crap passing for information out there. Well done Russ.

[SteveJohnson]

When you get right down to it, the greatest success in the history of sales has been that of the medical profession convincing the general population that they are and should be the ultimate authority on matters related to health.

Talk about the world's best con job.

That people so blindly accept the opinion of a physician as the last word continues to sadden me. Physicians know only what they are taught, just like the rest of us. Much of the new information they receive as ongoing education is paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. More than a few of the treatments they render are experimental -- they don't actually know how to 'cure' the condition, they're just trying what seemed to work last time. Basically, throwing s^*t against the wall and seeing if it sticks.

The Institute of Medicine's 1999 report, available here: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/1999/To-E...th-System.aspx says that as many as 98,000 deaths per year occur in the United States alone because of preventable medical errors. Other studies put the average number at twice that.

Blindly trust the word of a doctor? Not I.

[nettech]

This is the reason why I decided not to use offshore content writing companies (a particular one who is very well known on DP for their cheap rates). Basically, this time last year I requested lots of articles and they all came back without any research carried out.

When I get work done, I expect the text to be factual, this is how i write all my articles, all factual and as close to the truth as possible.

Boy thats scary. Money always comes second in my opnion when it comes to people health.

[DASHBOY]

Now that is scary!!

I really just hope people wouldn't be gullable enough to do that.

Graeme

[whateverpedia]

Originally Posted by TMG Enterprises

However, can you seriously blame the writer if someone follows the advice? People do have the responsibility of using their own brains before doing something so hare-brained.
Tina G

First off i agree with you 10,000%. However...

What would happen if someone acted on the "advice" in the article, and then sued the author after their situation worsened? Which way would the court go? For the author due to the reasons you mentioned, or against the author for publishing potentially lethal information?

Obviously each case would be judged individually, so I don't know the answer either.

What I do know is that if I were to give finanacial advice in an article I would first off need a license to give such advice, plus I would need to add all sorts of disclaimers to that advice. Without those it's jail time for me.

I would assume that there are even more stringent rules/laws applying to medical advice, ie the author needs a medical qualification, and once again with all sorts of disclaimers.

My OPINION (please note that word) is that when people are diagnosed with a life threatening illness, or facing finanacial ruin, they tend to become very desperate. Rational thought goes out the window. If something like this got to court, I'm sure (opinion again) the court would take into account the dilemma the "victim" finds themselves in and find for the "victim".

Again, though, you are right that people should take responsibilty for themselves, and treat anything they find on the internet with a grain of sodium chloride (including, but not limited to what I have just written).

All the best.

[kimvalerio05]

From this topic I know many of us find out the diff. side of being an article writers. But in the end still it's up to the people especially to the writers what they are going to do or what decision they will make.

[sdcast]

Most people obtain plr content and don't even read it. or read halfway and say ok sounds good to me. or people just spin the articles and don't really pay attention that it doesn't make sense.

but for a reader to actually follow the advice is actually scary.


sdcast

[Michael Taylor]

Originally Posted by jakesellers

If it was about factual information it'd be more like Wikipedia, collaboratively edited, peer reviewed, with standards for citations, original research and information sources...

You're talking about Wikipedia.org?

[Martin Luxton]

Originally Posted by whateverpedia

My OPINION (please note that word) is that when people are diagnosed with a life threatening illness, or facing financial ruin, they tend to become very desperate. Rational thought goes out the window.

I would argue that you could replace "rational thought" with "conventional thought".

If your doctor's mainstream treatment isn't working or making you worse, surely the rational thing is to look for an alternative. If you are desperate enough to do intensive research, that's good. If you are desperate enough to take the first alternative treatment you find, you're stupid. Even doctors advise you to get a second opinion.

Yes, there are people who give alternative health a bad name. My own personal experience of taking Acai berry is good, but scammy CPA offers are throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I did a healing course with a trainer following the National Federation of Spiritual Healers guidelines and that is light years away from the commercialized niche of Reiki.

You can become a certified Reiki healer in one weekend. A Master in 3 weekends. Yes, with 3 weekends of Reiki training you can help people but a "Master" in 48 hours? Come on.

Coming back to killing people, it's interesting the legal battle going on to stop the government killing people with the untested swine flu vaccine. Apparently they broke all their own safety rules in order to bring it to market as swiftly as possible.

Urgent lawsuit filed against FDA to halt swine flu vaccines; claims FDA violated federal law by Mike Adams the Health Ranger

Keep repeating the mantra:

Marketers bad, government good


Martin

[UKTim29]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

You don't think advising somebody to discontinue seeing their doctor when they have a life threatening condition is irresponsible?

I've got to admit, although your argument seems logical it does depend on the knowledge the article author has on the condition. As the post you refer to mentions, it all depends on who's the expert. The author might actually have some advice of real significance.

[whateverpedia]

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

I would argue that you could replace "rational thought" with "conventional thought".

And I wouldn't argue with your argument Martin. I hope that none of us ever finds ourselves in that position.

A decade or so ago my uncle had a mild heart attack, Whilst recovering in hospital the doctor came around and told him, "Well after that you're going to have to give up smoking".

My uncle replied "I've never smoked in my life".

The doc came back with "Oh", then wandered off and didn't make another appearance while my uncle was in there.

Medical degree from a cornflakes packet by the sound of it.

BTW My uncle is still alive and well today.

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by whateverpedia

And I wouldn't argue with your argument Martin. I hope that none of us ever finds ourselves in that position.

A decade or so ago my uncle had a mild heart attack, Whilst recovering in hospital the doctor came around and told him, "Well after that you're going to have to give up smoking".

My uncle replied "I've never smoked in my life".

The doc came back with "Oh", then wandered off and didn't make another appearance while my uncle was in there.

Medical degree from a cornflakes packet by the sound of it.

BTW My uncle is still alive and well today.

It's amazing to see the medical profession, the government ... basically anybody who dares to get in the way of an Internet marketer in hot pursuit of the big bucks get badmouthed. Fact is, the doctor may have been wrong about why your uncle had a heart attack, but your uncle did survive it on his watch and is still living today, as you say. Wonder what the results would have been if he'd bought an ebook from some crackerjack with a Clickbank account instead of seeking medical help when he had his heart attack.

[la dominatrix]

Yesterday I had an article to rewrite about the effects of green tea o nhte metabolism, but the maths was not correct. I therefore spent a further three hours reading scientific papers to get it rigth. I felt better but my bank balance did not. Will it make the owner of the material hire me another time I doubt it he did not get his article rewritten! Would I do it again yes a million times but that jsut makes me an idiot!
La dominatrix

[whateverpedia]

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

It's amazing to see the medical profession, the government ... basically anybody who dares to get in the way of an Internet marketer in hot pursuit of the big bucks get badmouthed. Fact is, the doctor may have been wrong about why your uncle had a heart attack, but your uncle did survive it on his watch and is still living today, as you say. Wonder what the results would have been if he'd bought an ebook from some crackerjack with a Clickbank account instead of seeking medical help when he had his heart attack.

I wasn't slagging off doctors, or anyone in the medical profession. I'm not even sure if that doc had anything to do with my uncle, he could've just been doing the rounds. My point was meant to be that doctors like everyone else are human.

I may also be one of the few who welcomes the new laws. I'm sure we've all been ripped off at some time and the laws seem like they are being brought in to protect consumers, something I believe in whole heartedly.

As for government intervention, what a pity that didn't happen on Wall St over the last few years. An even greater pity is, that despite the meltdown that loose regulation caused, no-one seems to be doing much to reign in the banks. Having got their bail out money, it's back to business as usual. In other words exactly the same thing will happen again. Only worse.

All the best.

[sbucciarel]

Originally Posted by whateverpedia

I wasn't slagging off doctors, or anyone in the medical profession. I'm not even sure if that doc had anything to do with my uncle, he could've just been doing the rounds. My point was meant to be that doctors like everyone else are human.

I may also be one of the few who welcomes the new laws. I'm sure we've all been ripped off at some time and the laws seem like they are being brought in to protect consumers, something I believe in whole heartedly.

As for government intervention, what a pity that didn't happen on Wall St over the last few years. An even greater pity is, that despite the meltdown that loose regulation caused, no-one seems to be doing much to reign in the banks. Having got their bail out money, it's back to business as usual. In other words exactly the same thing will happen again. Only worse.

All the best.

I welcome the new guide also, as long as they are being equitably applied. As they are written now, it seems to be a catch 22. There really isn't any way for an internet marketer to define "typical results" without paying a heap of money for market research and I don't think the guides are equally targeting TV ads as they are bloggers and online advertising.

I'm for consumer protection laws though and I think that Internet marketers should keep out of the medical niche, particularly when you're dealing with serious illness. There's enough money to be made in IM without profiting from people's misery and suffering.

There are also possible legal repurcussions from appearing to be giving medical advice when not qualified to do so. More than one Internet marketer has gotten into real hot water doing that.

[achivement84]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

Most of us get accused of being money hungry and over hyping things at some point but you have to be super careful about these types of things.

Thanks alot for the topic it`s really great, although i don`t wriet in health topics but i care to much ro what you stated even as a reader for this articles.I think any writer should has observance of conscience while he doing his work, and should also pay much attention to the data content he present to others,and think that many internet users may use this article as a guid.

[Hyaku_Man]

There are always going to be vultures and slackers out there, that will never change unless consumers wise up. I'm often pretty surprised by how much the average person assigns authority to webpages. If it's written on a webpage, a lot of people (let's say over age 40) assume it's written by an expert. They just don't understand the medium and that anyone can put content online.

I recently wrote an article on teaching kids about fire safety, just to get some backlinks for a kids site I have. I made sure to write in the article that this is not definitive information, please contact your local fire department or school board to get official and complete information. That's my responsibility when I dip into any area of health and safety.

I'm sure EZA wouldn't publish anything with dangerous advice, but others like goarticles approve your submissions automatically.