Comments on: Why Medscape Should Have Issued A Correction

By: deline

deline — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:25:47 +0000

Isn’t Medscape sponsored by Merck?

Here’s a 2006 interview with Harper, and a Canadian Medical Association article by Lippman, either of which you may not have. (My posting to ar;chive what has been removed from the television station site).
http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.women.health/msg/89770bc146137cd6?hl=en

Note, Harper appears initially to have been silenced. It wouldn’t be the first time. The Nancy Olivieri case case is still in litigation, with the latest move being a court order for her not to talk about her findings, research, attempts to warn her patients and Apotex, nor talk about the death threats and the like.

Lippman in CMAJ on Gardasil:
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/177/5/484

By: OK, We Were Wrong - Medscape Needs To Publish An Adequate Correction « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science

Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:42:26 +0000

[...] 13, 2008 · No Comments We recently explained Why Medscape Should Have Issued A Correction rather than just withdraw their lamentable article on Gardasil and the safety profile of HPV [...]

By: Mary Parsons

Mary Parsons — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:52:37 +0000

It’s good that you are following up on this. I don’t know what would be worse. That somebody made up that question and attributed it to a GP or that there is a GP somewhere who hasn’t noticed that cancer isn’t exclusively the fate of those with “poor nutritional status”. That statement is so ludicrous and ignorant that I wouldn’t know how to start on rebutting it.