Simon Singh of the UK learned that lesson the hard way.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/585-simon-singh-is-appealing.html

“In the UK, when someone is sued for libel, it’s up to the defendant to prove their innocence, rather than up to the claimant to prove harm was done. The effect of this is one of chilling any potential criticism; it can be dangerous for media to call to task an organization like the BCA (or any pseudoscientific claimants) because of the chance of getting sued. This has put quite a lot of pressure on Simon, as you can imagine.

Worse, a judge in a prelimary hearing ruled for the BCA, saying that Simon’s use of the word “bogus” indicated fraud (that is, intentional deception) on the part of the BCA, when it’s clear from the original article that is not what Simon meant”

Cheers!

In other words, she showed them, but couldn’t tell you how they’re used!
: )

Yeah, I can’t believe Jim Carrey dropped Lauren Holly for her.

While I’m of the same feeling as Bob on this stuff, I think the statement on Glucosamine might have been a bit irresponsible.

Yes, there were mixed results to earlier independent studies done on the possible benefits of consuming Glucosamine. However, more recent reports are showing some very positive effects.

Glucosamine is not a “placebo” substance. It is an important building block needed by the body to manufacture specialized molecules called glycosaminoglycans, found in cartilage. It is not normally present in significant amounts in most normal diets, making it a logical candidate for a supplement.

I’m not saying there aren’t concerns with its usage, either.
There may be compatibility issues with Glucosamine in those being treated for Diabetes, as it has demonstrated it may cause Insulin resistance. And because Glucosamine is stabilized with certain salts, there may be some concerns for those who have high blood pressure, or who need to watch their sodium intake.

Yes, there’s a lot of crap being pushed our way in the health front.
Glucosamine appears to be something researchers are taking seriously.

Ever heard of Thalidomide? It was in wide use from 1957 to 1961 and caused birth defects if given to pregnant women. Or what about Ephedrine, which can cause heart problems or even death?

I’m not saying that McCarthy’s right, but it’s not like this sort of thing has never happened before. Corporations put their bottom line first and people’s health second. No, they don’t intentionally market dangerous products, but often, they’re willing to put their own interests ahead of the people they’re supposed to be helping.

My friend had a heart attack a year or two ago. He had to have the operation where they thread a wire with a balloon on it into his artery and inflate it to open it up. He’s going broke paying the ridiculously high price of the heart medication his doctor says he needs to stay alive. Why isn’t he taking a generic version? There is none. The drug company that makes it gets the exclusive rights to it for a certain number of years before anyone else is allowed to make a cheaper, generic version of it. What if patients can’t afford it? I guess they die, after all, profits are more important that a few lives…