Article writers - just stop before you kill somebody!

[Russ Reynolds]

Man!

I was doing some research today for a project for one of my clients. I kept coming across articles written 'bum' style that had the most horrendous information.

One even advised that a cancer patient discontinued seeing their physician (and instead use their special concoction)!

I know the dude wants to make 20 bucks but holy ****, think about the actual person that might follow that advice...

It's downright scary.

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.

'Hey honey -- I put some poor guy in the hospital but I made my first 20 bucks online!'

Take it easy. Rant over.

Russ

[Nightengale]

Was that article on EZA??? Surely someone's reviewing the content???

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.

Michelle

[Oscar D]

Great post.

Hopefully this will make a few people think before they just write.

This is why not all information must be trusted online

[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.

[yourreviewer]

No wonder FTC comes up with their new rules and regulations. I agree it is a serious concern.

[Alican Yenidogan]

It is just funny what this topic is about and how people approve it. So Its like saying stop building websites just because of a few harmful websites... There are people who are GOOD at doing things and the opposite. Like there are good article spinners and bad article spinners.

Come on...

[Russ Reynolds]

Originally Posted by Alican Yenidogan

It is just funny what this topic is about and how people approve it. So Its like saying stop building websites just because of a few harmful websites... There are people who are GOOD at doing things and the opposite. Like there are good article spinners and bad article spinners.

Come on...

You know I am not talking about the good guys dude...

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

Man!

I was doing some research today for a project for one of my clients. I kept coming across articles written 'bum' style that had the most horrendous information.

One even advised that a cancer patient discontinued seeing their physician (and instead use their special concoction)!

I know the dude wants to make 20 bucks but holy ****, think about the actual person that might follow that advice...

It's downright scary.

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.

'Hey honey -- I put some poor guy in the hospital but I made my first 20 bucks online!'

Take it easy. Rant over.

Russ

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?

[Russ Reynolds]

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?

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

[edman]

I find that Russ's post is quite important actually.

Articles are supposed to be informative, well researched, and should allow the writer show of his/her expertise in that domain.

These days things have gone out of hand, people in an attempt to compete with the gazzilion articles published out there, go ahead to use the fastest way possible to creating articles... This can be to hire a cheap... sorry, in-experienced writer to do the writing, spin and respin content and ... why not respin one more time so the actual meaning is lost, without reviewing it.

The web is plagued with low quality content that no one wants to read.. and just as Russ has pointed out, can even be harmful.

This is a good wake up call to properly research your material before posting it live anywhere, as well aim to offer only quality to go with your name or pen name. It will always pay off.

Well done Russ

[TMG Enterprises]

I completely agree that there is a lot of erroneous information put out in the name of article marketing and the directories are full of some of the worst of it.

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.

Would you follow the advice of some unknown article writer?

Tina G

[ASM Marketing]

It's tragic that the need to sell 'magical' cures has come to this... it's downright dangerous, and immoral, to play on somebodies desperation like this. To me this says two things; check your writer's work, or check yourself!

- Research from authority sources for ANYTHING that requires specialist information such as certain medical and dietery niches, and I think we all know that cancer is one of them specialist areas.

Thanks for the wake up call Russ,

Alex

[Russ Reynolds]

Originally Posted by TMG Enterprises

I completely agree that there is a lot of erroneous information put out in the name of article marketing and the directories are full of some of the worst of it.

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.

Would you follow the advice of some unknown article writer?

Tina G

Ultimately it is the readers responsibility to look after their own health but I still don't think that gives us a blank ticket to spew crap.

I still think we have a moral responsibility to be careful about what we write.

BTW - everybody makes mistakes - I do and I sure get called on the mat for it sometimes.

[Zanti]

I wasn't going to comment on this but I feel I have to.

I agree with Russ on this. I do deal with a life threatening cancer. When I was first diagnosed I had a lot of well meaning friends say, "try this or that, Hey, I sell these vitamins and they will help you". I've always been a believer in alternative medicine and have found some things to help me, but I never gave up my team of Dr.'s at the Univ. of Mich. Cancer Center. If I had only listened to what other's were saying, I would have been out of money sooner and would not be alive today. Making a buck is not worth causing harm to anyone. That's one of the problems in IM and business as well. But that's for a another discussion.

So, yes I think anyone who would say stop seeing your Dr. and just use this, is irresponsible and a threat.

I have also seen a lot of really bad writing on EZA and it blows me away that people put their name and/or website on these articles, and get traffic. Now I don't have any articles yet, but I soon will have and each one will always be an article of quality, well written and proving help and information to the intended audience.

Zanti

[TelegramSam]

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?

All I mean Russ is that there are a lot of Doctors who don't advocate chemo therapy for cancer etc. and do suggest you don't go down that route.

If it worked 100% of the time then it would be irresponsible for sure, but it doesn't. Not even close.

They advocate lifestyle changes, diet, exercise and such like. Not just a drink of weed juice or whatever.

Just a point I was trying to make.

What you or I may think is crap, for someone else it could be almost an epiphany.

Sam

[Russ Reynolds]

Originally Posted by TelegramSam

All I mean Russ is that there are a lot of Doctors who don't advocate chemo therapy for cancer etc. and do suggest you don't go down that route.

If it worked 100% of the time then it would be irresponsible for sure, but it doesn't. Not even close.

They advocate lifestyle changes, diet, exercise and such like. Not just a drink of weed juice or whatever.

Just a point I was trying to make.

What you or I may think is crap, for someone else it could be almost an epiphany.

Sam

Hi Sam...I completely agree with you so I must not have made myself clear in my OP. I think it is fine, admiral even to suggest alternative treatments but I see no need to out and out tell the person to stop seeing the doctor.

[Michael Oksa]

Originally Posted by Nightengale

Was that article on EZA??? Surely someone's reviewing the content???

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.

Michelle

Hi Michelle,

Nope. EZA, as a rule, does NOT review the accuracy of any content as far as I know. They have a full-time job just enforcing their easy to understand (and follow) terms of service.

If EZA would start reviewing the content, then what would happen if someone experienced an ill effect from something that got past the editors? In that case, the author and reader could say that EZA reviewed the content - so it must have been OK.

All the best,
Michael

[Zanti]

One other thing, when some one is told that they have terminal cancer, often we don't think straight. We sometimes want to grab hold of anything that might prove the Dr.'s wrong and give us hope.

So, yes I can blame the writer of this kind of misinformation. With cancer and other serious illnesses, people are not always in the best mind frame to make the best responsible decisions. And others will often prey on this vulnerable time of a person to make a quick buck.

Ok, I'm done.

Z

[edman]

Another good point...

Of course misleading information may be part of some peoples strategy to make a buck, and no one can do anything about that

However, whoever reads this thread and probably out of ignorance decided it was OK to publish anything on a sensitive topic should think again.

Originally Posted by Zanti

One other thing, when some one is told that they have terminal cancer, often we don't think straight. We sometimes want to grab hold of anything that might prove the Dr.'s wrong and give us hope.

So, yes I can blame the writer of this kind of misinformation. With cancer and other serious illnesses, people are not always in the best mind frame to make the best responsible decisions. And others will often prey on this vulnerable time of a person to make a quick buck.

Ok, I'm done.

Z

[Troy_Phillips]

Originally Posted by TMG Enterprises

I completely agree that there is a lot of erroneous information put out in the name of article marketing and the directories are full of some of the worst of it.

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.

Would you follow the advice of some unknown article writer?

Tina G

In this situation the customer may be grasping at straws and it could mean the difference in life or death .

Bull**** me all you want when it comes to taking my money . Mess with my life and .... well you can take it from there

[jakesellers]

The point of EZA isn't factual information, 95% of it would be gone. It's just a big mass of Google bait. 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, and no backlinks promoting ebooks and mailing lists.

[TMG Enterprises]

In this situation the customer may be grasping at straws and it could mean the difference in life or death .

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

[Martin Luxton]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

Man!
I kept coming across articles written 'bum' style that had the most horrendous information . . .

. . . you have to be super careful about these types of things.

Russ,

Two things.

1. People writing that kind of stuff without a solid background are stupid and dangerous.

2. People who heed medical advice from article sites are stupid and dangerous.

There are so many incredible websites with reliable medical information written by doctors (often specialists). Unfortunately, people don't use their common sense.

The other night I was looking for dosage information from the manufacturer of Calpol (paracetamol syrup for feverish kids) and I came across a forum where parents were advising other parents to give it every night before bedtime because it "helps them sleep" and "keeps them quiet".

Then you got the grateful replies "Thank you so much! My baby is so much more sleepy now".

Sometimes you wish people needed to get a licence before they could have kids.

Martin

[SurviveUnemployment]

The article directories are going to end up being totally worthless to everyone -- including internet marketers -- if they don't start vetting for this kind of stuff. That is truly disgusting.

[WritingMadwoman]

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

The other night I was looking for dosage information from the manufacturer of Calpol (paracetamol syrup for feverish kids) and I came across a forum where parents were advising other parents to give it every night before bedtime because it "helps them sleep" and "keeps them quiet".

Then you got the grateful replies "Thank you so much! My baby is so much more sleepy now".

Sometimes you wish people needed to get a licence before they could have kids.

Martin

Recently on a box of allergy medicine I noticed that there was a warning not to use it to make children sleepy - that struck me as so odd that they would need to put that on their label, but your example makes it clear why they have to. Disturbing to say the least!

Wendy

[dsmpublishing]

I am a big fan of the bum marketing method and have made lots of money from it. But a big but.....

Do your research - i would never write a bum article on something i didnt know much about as its about rushing it out there i would choose subjects that i am really experienced in and certainly not ones where i would put peoples lives at risk this is really scary stuff.

Thanks for sharing it with us.

kind regards


sam
X

[Neromancer]

Sounds scary - I'm glad I have this forum to keep it straight - and I hope people really don't want to make a buck that way

[Marhelper]

I agree with you Russ. It is easy to get in the habit of hyping everything but forgetting that we are talking about real people reading our articles with real conditions.

[JVManna]

In the matter of ethics and marketing -- one can't sacrifice one for the other. Especially in the medical field. I find it despicable that someone would advocate to not visit a real physician when examining their medical issue.

We all know that the Internet is becoming more of a trusted resource. EZA and other article sites are just swamps of questionable (and even unethical) information. Marketers as a whole need to dial back their need for SEO, backlinks and "article marketing" and start to think more about the real people the intend to influence.

~Joe

[Michael Franklin]

I haven't seen this article so I don't want to assume it BUT.....I would guess that the author probably outsourced this article to someone else to write it. After he received his outsourced article, he then probably submitted it without even looking it over for syntax, flow....or accuracy.

Many article marketers go the route of outsourcing the articles and then mass submitting them. Combine that with the low fees that many third parties are willing to accept to write articles, you now have mass-produced low quality articles. Even though, these marketers think that they are winning the game with their sheer numbers, they are fooling themselves (as well as their readers).

I know that the purpose of outsourcing is to save time so you can do other productive things, but as a responsible article marketer, you still need to invest some time to review what content you are receiving from your third parties.

[tommygadget]

Originally Posted by Alican Yenidogan

It is just funny what this topic is about and how people approve it. So Its like saying stop building websites just because of a few harmful websites... There are people who are GOOD at doing things and the opposite. Like there are good article spinners and bad article spinners.

Come on...

See, I kind of disagree with you. I build websites and submit articles, but I feel compelled to draw the line at GIVING ADVICE THAT MIGHT KILL SOMEBODY... That's all I'm saying; doesn't that give everyone enough latitude? Hmm?

TomG.

[Randy Bheites]

Selling snake oil is the world's second oldest profession.

[genietoast]

I don't remember where I got the information from, but I heard that Google was cracking down on keywords related to medicine/pharmaceutical-type niches. So if you're not really a certified authority, then it's going to be harder to try to promote those niches.

I know that Squidoo will not allow you to write about any pharmaceuticals, including Hoodia, Acai Berry, Weight Loss, etc.

[Rob Whisonant]

Many don't realize that you are 100% responsible for what you write and put in the public eye.

I can easily see these chain of events happening.

1. Person takes the idiots advise.
2. Person dies.
3. Family sues the writer and wins.
4. Local DA files criminal charges and wins. In this case practicing medicine without a license.
5. Writer loses everything and either goes to prison or moves under a bridge.
6. Writers family goes on welfare and we have to support them.

Re's
Rob Whisonant

[Craig McPherson]

An article directory I am a member of insists we put medical disclaimers at the bottom of the article if it is in this field.

[Macurdy]

Personally, I will refuse content that I don't feel comfortable writing about. I have even spoken up about business opps or IM products where I can find almost NO positive testimonials. Writing about medical information which might cause someone to do serious harm to themselves is criminal in my opinion. I am not saying others should follow my lead, but if we always push responsibility off to others, then you are basically saying the almighty dollar owns your morals...if your boss tells you to shoot someone, are you in the clear because you are "just following orders?" Writers, use your heads AND your hearts...this kind of pure crap is irresponsible and disgraceful.

Russ, thanks for the post. As a son who just gave his father bone marrow to save him from his 4th battle against cancer, I hate this crap with a passion. I write in the health/fitness niche daily, and the putrid sludge I come across daily is just a shame. I am glad that I am in a position to turn away jobs of this ilk...

Mac the Knife

[Istvan Horvath]

Originally Posted by jakesellers

The point of EZA isn't factual information, 95% of it would be gone. It's just a big mass of Google bait.

Yes, you know that and I know that... because we both are "expert authors" on EZA.

But how would a desperate cancer patient know that all that BS posted by "experts" is just google bait???

My wife is a cancer survivor. Plus, she is a medical doctor working full time. Nevertheless, you could never imagine the quantity of idiotic articles, forum posts and other "expert" materials she was able to dig up from the internet in her most desperate, sleepless wee hours... Trust me, many times I wished I had an Uzi and pay a visit to those experts that play with our biggest fear (of death) and abuse the desperation of ill people.

I want to make as much money with IM as anybody else. Just not at any price.

[j hogan]

I work with clients with serious mental health issues and I get furious at the amount of outdated bull*%t that gets written online about these issues.It should be illegal.

Article marketers who do 'research' by just reading three top articles at an article directory can often promote things that are not just ineffective, but dangerous.

I write articles in this area that are based on the latest, evidenced based research. For example, there are many natural treatments that are effective for SOME disorders. There are also many that are NOT effective, and when you promote them you put someones life at risk.

Two serious examples of natural health treatments I am currently dealing with: a person with OCD that has ceased medication to use natural treatment after reading an online article saying it was 'proven'. There is not one piece of scientific evidence to support this. The consequences are going to effect a lot of people and it's going to set treatment back months. The whole family is now suffering, his work is affected and he's struggling on his 'natural cure' that he found online.

The second is a very serious situation of a teenager, with severe depression who followed the the advice of a very popular site regarding medications. the consequences have been devastating for her and her family as she suffers severe mental illness. I fear for this persons safety, as do her parents. I wish the writer of that article had to answer the desperate phone calls instead of me.

So while that site drags in the money, with no consequences, mental health professionals and families bear the burden of trying to prevent self harm in our vulnerable teenagers who unfortunately think what they read online is 'true'.

so if you promote treatments for health conditions, remember you ARE affecting vulnerable people while you make your $20 affiliate commission. Remember that while your happily cashing your check for a natural 'cure' , health professional are desperately trying to pick up the pieces before it's too late.

[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

[kenboss]

Originally Posted by Craig McPherson

An article directory I am a member of insists we put medical disclaimers at the bottom of the article if it is in this field.

Craig I think you've nailed it here. I think a general disclaimer is the most sensible solution and should be followed by ALL article directories. I would extend this to articles in the legal category as well as medical. Something along the lines of "The information contained in the above article should in no way be construed as authoritative, and readers are strongly advised to consult with a qualified medical/legal professional before acting on any advice given."

There will ALWAYS be irresponsible writers out there, (or indeed writers who simply make mistakes or unwittingly pass on false info) and there will ALWAYS be gullible and/or desperate people who will follow advice blindly simply because it appears in print.

For any article directory to try to introduce a viable system of vetting would be a nightmare. The question of where exactly do you draw the line, where do you set your standards in terms of content, would a subject of endless debate. Not to mention the fact that we'd be starting down that rocky road to censorship.

A disclaimer, on the other hand, highlights the potential problem while acting as a caveat to which the reader can apply their own judgment and discretion. It also will HOPEFULLY deliver a subtle reminder to the writers of their obligation to take a responsible approach. Some might argue that it simply gives the writers carte-blanche - but in fact that's what they have already. This just helps limit their credibility in matters which could seriously affect people's lives.

Russ this is a fantastic thread. I hope everyone understands by now that you are not condemning article writing in itself, merely pleading that we become a little more self-regulating in terms of our content - because it's the bad or negligent writers who not only put gullible people at risk, they spoil it for everyone by giving articles a bad name.

Just look what happened to the used car business!

Ken

[Dally137]

I think when you put it like that it becomes more of a moral responsibility of the writer. It like a doctor prescribing the wrong medicine to the readers. I personally take articles seriously. Wonder, what would other people like me face?

[j hogan]

I'm certainly not bashing natural health, it's very effective for a lot of health problems, I'm talking about that having evidence of that effectiveness with proper scientific research before promoting it for a particular condition when peoples lives are at stake.

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by j hogan

I work with clients with serious mental health issues and I get furious at the amount of outdated bull*%t that gets written online about these issues.It should be illegal.

Article marketers who do 'research' by just reading three top articles at an article directory can often promote things that are not just ineffective, but dangerous.

I write articles in this area that are based on the latest, evidenced based research. For example, there are many natural treatments that are effective for SOME disorders. There are also many that are NOT effective, and when you promote them you put someones life at risk.

Two serious examples of natural health treatments I am currently dealing with: a person with OCD that has ceased medication to use natural treatment after reading an online article saying it was 'proven'. There is not one piece of scientific evidence to support this. The consequences are going to effect a lot of people and it's going to set treatment back months. The whole family is now suffering, his work is affected and he's struggling on his 'natural cure' that he found online.

The second is a very serious situation of a teenager, with severe depression who followed the the advice of a very popular site regarding medications. the consequences have been devastating for her and her family as she suffers severe mental illness. I fear for this persons safety, as do her parents. I wish the writer of that article had to answer the desperate phone calls instead of me.

So while that site drags in the money, with no consequences, mental health professionals and families bear the burden of trying to prevent self harm in our vulnerable teenagers who unfortunately think what they read online is 'true'.

so if you promote treatments for health conditions, remember you ARE affecting vulnerable people while you make your $20 affiliate commission. Remember that while your happily cashing your check for a natural 'cure' , health professional are desperately trying to pick up the pieces before it's too late.

What's your solution? Drug them into a stupor so they no longer behave "inappropriately"?

Or do you give them ECT?

Or do you tie them to a bed or lock them into a rubber room?

Have any of your colleagues ever mistreated a patient? Perhaps with wet towels?

How dare you to think you have all of the answers with these problems.

Just because you are paid by the self installed "medical health authorities" what makes you think your barbaric methods (physically or mentally or drugged) methods are best for your patient.

And don't bother spewing any psychiatric government statistics at me because I could spew the real facts and figures back to you, especially for Australia, the US and the UK.

The subject is complicated, but it seems 95% of the time your only solution is drugs!

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by j hogan

I'm certainly not bashing natural health, it's very effective for a lot of health problems, I'm talking about that having evidence of that effectiveness with proper scientific research before promoting it for a particular condition when peoples lives are at stake.

How many drug companies' "scientific" research turns out to be falsified, hidden and downright illegal?

I think it only gets looked into and discovered when after a few thousand people get killed inadvertently by their doctors prescriptions etc.

Just because they have paid "someone" a few million or billion for a "seal" of approval doesn't mean it works, or there won't be side effect, or deaths.

Oh, but if it has the offical "seal of approval" then it must be ok right?

[Russ Reynolds]

Just so my point of view is clear as the OP.

I am not against alternative medicine; in fact I am in favor of it. I just don't see anything wrong with a sensible approach like advising your readers to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

I just don't see the need to tell them to stop seeing their doctor.

[j hogan]

telegram sam, your jumping to a lot of very inaccurate conclusions about me and about my post to which I am not going to respond.

I'm referring to the use of natural 'cures' for serious illnesses where there is no evidence for that and highlighting the fact for that for vulnerable people the effects are very real and can be very devastating.

I'm asking article writers to keep that in mind when they write about these topics and look past a quick buck.

I think a lot of article marketers do a good job, but I think the point of this thread is to serve as a reminder to be responsible writers, which I fully agree with.

So I shared two incidents from personal experience.

readers can draw their own conclusions.

end of story.





thats it.

[TelegramSam]

Originally Posted by Russ Reynolds

Just so my point of view is clear as the OP.

I am not against alternative medicine; in fact I am in favor of it. I just don't see anything wrong with a sensible approach like advising your readers to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

I just don't see the need to tell them to stop seeing their doctor.

Very sensible comments.

Sadly though, a lot of doctors are so blinkered that they don't think of alternative medicine as having any merit.

Ask a doctor can you take garlic whilst taking a cholesterol drug and he may say no.

He is unlikely to say "why don't you stop taking the cholesterol drug and the other 3 drugs you take, to try and handle the side effects and just start taking garlic everyday and cutting out the burgers".

[howudoin]

Man!

I was doing some research today for a project for one of my clients. I kept coming across articles written 'bum' style that had the most horrendous information.

One even advised that a cancer patient discontinued seeing their physician (and instead use their special concoction)!

I know the dude wants to make 20 bucks but holy ****, think about the actual person that might follow that advice...

It's downright scary.

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.

'Hey honey -- I put some poor guy in the hospital but I made my first 20 bucks online!'

Take it easy. Rant over.

Russ

You've made a good point russ but let's also look at the offline world and see as to how patients (Of cancer or otherwise) are treated in the offline world:::::

You go to a doctor with a disease and he will say "WE have two options namely A and B and here are the risk and benefits of both--- What do you want to do?" Point is, that the patient has to decide the final diagnosis approach even after approaching the doctor. In other words, the responsibility of treatment is also on the patient. In medical science this thing is becoming more popular and there's actually a term for it-- "patient autonomy".

Now coming to your post, I certainly got no idea as to what treatment was being promoted in the above article but it is a common practice (and encouraged) to discontinue a certain diagnosis after making a switch to another. Maybe the Article marketer in question was promoting this product to an audience who have failed to secure a cure using the regular hospital system.

In any case, AM's have to remember to practice due diligence by doing the research from standard and reputable sources only.

Bhupinder

[Sully Chaudry]

Just an example of how some topics should not be written about at all without a medical disclaimer of some sort, and also how poor some writers are at real research.

[mediasamurai]

Some writers don't even take time to do good research. They just write things they want, things that can just give them money.