Comments on: Quackometer Comments… http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html Experiments and Thoughts on Quackery, Health Beliefs and Pseudoscience Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:52:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Cialis http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-10393 Cialis Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:54:53 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-10393 ctMRmJ Thank you for the material. Do you mind if I posted it in her blog, of course, with reference to your site? ctMRmJ Thank you for the material. Do you mind if I posted it in her blog, of course, with reference to your site?

]]> By: Derrik http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-7887 Derrik Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:54:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-7887 Your top banner doesn't display properly in the google Chrome browser. Everything else is fine.<br /><br />This is not important, I only mention it in case you hadn’t noticed. <br /><br />Please continue your excellent work. Your top banner doesn’t display properly in the google Chrome browser. Everything else is fine.

This is not important, I only mention it in case you hadn’t noticed.

Please continue your excellent work.

]]> By: quacknet http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4969 quacknet Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:22:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4969 Dear Old Duck,<br/><br/>In light of the adage that you can tell a man by his enemies - you're doing the right thing.The self-regarding ignorance and hostility to reason demonstrated by your detractors reveals that they are still living, for the most part, in a pre-enlightenment world. People might not like what clarity and rationale show them - but the alternatives are even less appealing. <br/><br/>Good luck, and check out Ben Goldacre (if you are not he)<br/>Paul C Dear Old Duck,

In light of the adage that you can tell a man by his enemies – you’re doing the right thing.The self-regarding ignorance and hostility to reason demonstrated by your detractors reveals that they are still living, for the most part, in a pre-enlightenment world. People might not like what clarity and rationale show them – but the alternatives are even less appealing.

Good luck, and check out Ben Goldacre (if you are not he)
Paul C

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4943 Anonymous Thu, 24 May 2007 13:06:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4943 We're currently spending £250 per month (actually the missus is not me) with a company who's website you give 8 canards to - good job I have a sense of humour..... We’re currently spending £250 per month (actually the missus is not me) with a company who’s website you give 8 canards to – good job I have a sense of humour…..

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4873 Anonymous Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:41:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4873 Yes! Yes! Yes!<br/><br/>If it looks like a duck...<br/><br/>Keep up the excellent work Yes! Yes! Yes!

If it looks like a duck…

Keep up the excellent work

]]> By: Tim http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4871 Tim Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:35:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4871 What a neat idea! I look forward to watching your quackometer improve over time in response to reasonable feedback (unlike quackery).<br/><br/>To those who post rants on your message board because an ALGORITHM ranks their website a certain way: Methinks the quacker doth protest too much... What a neat idea! I look forward to watching your quackometer improve over time in response to reasonable feedback (unlike quackery).

To those who post rants on your message board because an ALGORITHM ranks their website a certain way: Methinks the quacker doth protest too much…

]]> By: Mary http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4866 Mary Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:02:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4866 Hurrah! A naturopathist gave a "presentation" (read: sales talk) to an ME support group I am on the email list for. She got the full 10 Canards!<br/><br/>I am sick of people telling me that because they have been lucky enough to spontaneously recover from *whatever illness* with the passage of time, <b>I</b> should give them all my money in the hope that the same might happen to me.<br/><br/>That said, there is (so far as I know) no law against extracting money from the gullible. So good luck to 'em. Hurrah! A naturopathist gave a “presentation” (read: sales talk) to an ME support group I am on the email list for. She got the full 10 Canards!

I am sick of people telling me that because they have been lucky enough to spontaneously recover from *whatever illness* with the passage of time, I should give them all my money in the hope that the same might happen to me.

That said, there is (so far as I know) no law against extracting money from the gullible. So good luck to ‘em.

]]> By: Damian Stryker http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4859 Damian Stryker Wed, 18 Apr 2007 03:29:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4859 Great site! It illustrates how easily quackery can be identified--even a computer program can do it, so why is it so hard for some people?<br/><br/>I found a site with nine out of 10 canards! <br/>www.nudgez.com<br/><br/>If the quackmeter gave points for egregious use of rainbow colors, Kristin Kopp could have gotten all ten. Better luck next time, Kristin. Great site! It illustrates how easily quackery can be identified–even a computer program can do it, so why is it so hard for some people?

I found a site with nine out of 10 canards!
http://www.nudgez.com

If the quackmeter gave points for egregious use of rainbow colors, Kristin Kopp could have gotten all ten. Better luck next time, Kristin.

]]> By: Le Canard Noir http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4810 Le Canard Noir Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:38:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4810 Catherine!<br/><br/>A pleasure to see you here and can I just say, keep up the good work!<br/><br/>Um, I'm not sure though what your request is about. The quackometer gives you a very healthy 0 with various combinations of your name. A result I am happy to stick with.<br/><br/>Am I missing something? Catherine!

A pleasure to see you here and can I just say, keep up the good work!

Um, I’m not sure though what your request is about. The quackometer gives you a very healthy 0 with various combinations of your name. A result I am happy to stick with.

Am I missing something?

]]> By: Catherine Collins http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4809 Catherine Collins Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:18:00 +0000 http://www.quackometer.net/wpblog/2006/04/quackometer-comments.html#comment-4809 Hello there Little Black Duck. <br/>Must admit to being tad reluctant to wade through all the woo plus self-promoting individuals to reach here, but now that I'm here, here goes! <br/><br/>Love the site, enjoy your comments, and recommend it to colleagues frequently! <br/><br/>But your little quackometer needs a teeny adjustment. I'm often asked to comment on the weird and wonderful foods/tests/supplements/practices that income generate for the mock-docs and nut nutritionists. So the quackometer is correct to associate me with these.....BUT I've never endorsed such amateur musings, preferring evidence based or biologically plausible approaches instead. <br/>So perhaps the Quackometer Mark II can incorporate such anti-quack comments??<br/>Catherine Collins RD<br/>not going to sue, whinge, or drown my favourite bath duck if nothing changes. No conflict of interest. No website to direct web traffic to. Pure NHS and proud of it! Hello there Little Black Duck.
Must admit to being tad reluctant to wade through all the woo plus self-promoting individuals to reach here, but now that I’m here, here goes!

Love the site, enjoy your comments, and recommend it to colleagues frequently!

But your little quackometer needs a teeny adjustment. I’m often asked to comment on the weird and wonderful foods/tests/supplements/practices that income generate for the mock-docs and nut nutritionists. So the quackometer is correct to associate me with these…..BUT I’ve never endorsed such amateur musings, preferring evidence based or biologically plausible approaches instead.
So perhaps the Quackometer Mark II can incorporate such anti-quack comments??
Catherine Collins RD
not going to sue, whinge, or drown my favourite bath duck if nothing changes. No conflict of interest. No website to direct web traffic to. Pure NHS and proud of it!

]]>