Re: Lingustic tricks in controversial research papers? - Re: mold treatments ...

[Guest guest]

Quackadilian,

Yes. You are exactly right. Science papers that are in reality nothing

more than spin, typically have only one or two key sentences that do not fit

with the rest of the paper. But, they are in reality, the gist or spin of the

purpose of the paper.

When I read science papers, I read the title, the first 3 sentences and then

the last two sentences. That is typically enough to tell if there is a

disconnect somewhere in the middle and if it is necessary to read the whole

paper

to identify the spin concept.

Then when I fnd the spin concept, I look at the references in support of

this spin. 99.9% the reference does not support the spin sentence in the

paper.

And if it does, 99.9% of the time, the reference is also by the author of

the subject spin paper.

This is an excellent example: The American College of Medical Toxicology's

position statement on mold. Know that it is authored by ex-VeriTox employee,

Sudakin (or at least he is not listed on their website anymore as

being associated, as of about August 5, 2008) . See if you can find the

hidden

picture.

_http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=12 & _id=52 & zine=show_

(http://www.acmt.net/cgi/page.cgi?aid=12 & _id=52 & zine=show)

Sharon K

In a message dated 12/29/2008 9:55:33 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,

quackadillian@... writes:

Certainly,

I can see many areas where one group or another chooses to ignore or

worse, attack a body of research.