Site Stuff – Is It Time to Ban Some Commenters?
Dr Rassman
As a hair transplant patient, physician, and clinical scientist, your site is a model of providing responsive, measured, accurate, educational (and sometimes humorous) information about alopecia. How you have the time to do this essentially volunteer service and your other activities is just amazing. I am a believer in freedom of speech and comments on your blog run the entire gamut of the well-informed to the misinformed. Such is life. Indeed, even posts with far-out, alternative ways of looking at things can be of value.
However, over the past year, one particular blogger has made continuous personal attacks on you ranging from the naïve (questioning your cardiovascular fellowship based on a conversation he had with a “friendâ€) to the absurd. It is non-stop. He makes similar personal attacks on others who objectively disagree with him and seems to have a bias against intellectuals, those familiar with clinical data, those who understand the biopharmaceutical industry, and anyone who does not think that Propecia is not an evil drug and that Merck is days away from “being in great trouble†for “hiding†data (paraphrasing).
Most of his posts invoke conspiracy theories. His arguments are littered with enough semi-scientific information (never substantiated) to make the scared and uninformed reader possibly confused. However, my biggest concern is the almost incessant stream of misinformation from this blogger and the significant amount of time others have to respond (only to receive the inevitable name-calling response). Several sources have also suggested that this blogger is a shill for a website involved in recruiting Propecia patients in a class action lawsuit. In the name of constructive censorship (common on blogs), isn’t it time to put his abusive posts to rest (i.e., ban him from this site).
The posts on my blog are opinions (of myself and contributing editors). The site is not meant for diagnosis or treatment and we’ve posted that disclaimer on every page. If any readers want a professional or personal medical consultation they can always contact us.
I do occasionally follow some of the comment threads and I realize that anyone can write false information, including making wild (and comical) accusations about me. I know there are a few people that are very vocal and leave comments on nearly every Propecia posting, and I think the average reader can decide what they want to believe if they actually followed those lengthy comment diatribes. If someone gets obscene, the comment is removed. It’s happened, but it’s not something I deal with too often. We do reserve the right not to post some of the comments we receive, but we do allow the great majority of comments through (besides spam and completely off-topic stuff).
If anything, I find the volley of comments entertaining, but perhaps you’re right. Perhaps it is time to limit the comments that are not meant to be constructive. It’s something I’ll consider, for sure.
I am normally against censorship, but in this case, I would totally support the banning of this “Jeremy” character. I don’t think anyone would fault you for it.
You shouldn’t allow this blog to be a forum for his conspiracy theories, his peddling of pseudo-science, and his constant twisting of the facts. I, and many others, have pointed out his misunderstandings of the evidence, and he doesn’t care. He goes right back to his same tired arguments.
He obviously has an agenda and should be banned.
The problem, Raj, is that Jeremy has gone beyond merely sharing his “opinion.” He has engaged in a determined effort to twist facts and to deliberately, and knowingly, spread misinformation. He should not be allowed to promote fear mongering. Free speech has its limits, and he has exceeded them.
Oh man, now that there is a blog entry about him, he will never come down from his high horse!
Seriously though, I don’t believe Jeremy or anyone else (except for the rare belligerent drunkard) should be banned from posting. I don’t think he is a shill or anything more than an individual that believes he has been wronged. He has basically stated that Dr. Rassman is the one responsible for convincing him to take Finasteride, and he will stop at nothing to discredit the good doctor in any way possible.
I don’t think anyone should be banned who is not obscene or a spammer. A fair exchange of ideas is what helps ferret out truth from fiction. We learn from it.
Start censoring people’s ideas and opinions and now you’ve got a site with an agenda, like so many others.
Daniel – Once again, its freedom of speech and anybody is allowed to post anything as long as its not threatening or physically harming anybody. Bottom line, you have to take everything with a grain of salt. Its up to the individual who reads this blog to decipher what is fact and what is fiction.
There will always be two sides to story, and I have read some of the things posted by Jeremy. He has said some pretty idiotic things at times, however, he does present some interesting facts and arguments which are not completely irrelevant from time to time. The major problem I have, when he slanders Dr.Rassman and challenges his credentials. That is something that should not be allowed and it makes Jeremy look like a completely idiot.
Its seems like a lot of people on here know what Jeremy is like and do not take whatever he says seriously anyways. We shouldn’t give this more attention then it needs and no need to stretch it out anymore. If he posts something really outrageous then ban him completely otherwise let him say what he wants to say while the rest of us can enjoy this blog for what is was meant for.
It seems the notion of what free speech entails is epidemically misunderstood. Free speech does not give one the right to say whatever they want. As I said earlier, there are limits to free speech, and Jeremy has exceeded them. On top of that, this is a blog on the internet. Free speech is not a right, here. It’s only a privilege.
I do not believe free speech should protect those who deliberately spread false information. Jeremy is not simply sharing his opinions here. He is promoting an agenda of fear. He has twisted and misrepresented facts and figures constantly. Why should that be protected?
I said it before, and I will will say it again. I believe that Jeremy is somehow connected to the lawsuits that are underway. Major law firms that specialize in class-action lawsuits are known to employ people to “poison the well,” so to speak. It was done years back during the silicone-breast-implant lawsuits, so it certainly is not without precedent. I believe that’s his purpose here.
You guys realize that the right to “free speech” means nothing when you post on a privately owned right? It doesn’t exist. You don’t have that right.
The same applies to other venues like your job, etc.
privately owned website*
There isn’t really much for me to say in regards to this post but it seems overwhelming clear that the vast majority of posters here support maintaining free speech on this blog. While it would be logistically very difficult for the administrators to be any individual on this website, it is not even in their best interest and would seriously undermine their credibility.
However, I would like to address DK’s attempt to undermine me. He has repeatedly (falsely) accused me of working for a law firm which I have claimed is untrue. He has not provided a shred of evidence for why one may even begin to think such a thing. He also states it is a common tactic for law firms to hire people to post negative comments online, which is also false and completely unreasonable. I challenge you to find a single report of a law firm hiring somebody in recent years to post online in support of litigation. The logic here is a complete non-sequitur as there is no benefit to be had from doing such a thing. Merck has in the past sent an ‘army’ of people to discredit and destroy the careers of those who have spoken out against them and their willingness to kill innocent patients to grow their bottom line. I have provided incontrovertible proof for this in the past.
Jeremy, would you happen to have any proof of Merck’s army that has been deployed to destroy the careers of others and their willingness to kill innocent people? You do realize what the level of proof is when making a statement of either murder/manslaughter or slander (in a court of law). I do not hold Big Pharma in the highest of regards but also am not a big proponent of hyperbolic statements – tend to be (as a scientist) be a bit more rationale and require proof from multiple sources in terms of such strong statements.
Raj, with all due respect, it seems as though you are not aware of Jeremy’s entire history here.
Daniel – Trust me, I am frequently on this blog, sometimes I think I’m on here to much if you know what I mean.
I am aware of Jeremy’s posts and his stance on certain issues. I also know that there are people that disagree with what he has to say, and I’m sure there are those people out there that agree with him.
Look, I don’t want to get into an all out debate on here but Jeremy has requested in his post, that all those accusing him should provide factual evidence to back up what they are saying. Bottom line, I don’t know Jeremy I don’t know you. In fact, I don’t know anybody on here and I don’t care to know. I use this blog as an information hub and I, like many readers out there, want to hear two sides to story no matter how outlandish they might be. Like I said earlier, I don’t like how Jeremy personally attacked Dr.Rassman and that is something that should not be condoned.
I am going to leave it at that. If Dr.Rassman and his team feel that Jeremy or any other individual has crossed the line I am sure they will deal with it accordingly and not allow that individual to post anything. Simple.
There is no way to silence everybody. We are all critics in our own right. Its better to not dwell to much into this and not give Jeremy all this attention that he is probably loving right now. LOL.
Have a good day.
“that all those accusing him should provide factual evidence to back up what they are saying”
You have this completely bass ackwards, Raj. Jeremy is the one that is trying to shove his theories down OUR throats! Theories that Merck and the FDA have some sort of conspiracy going on, and that all of the studies currently done on Finasteride are false and that evidence supporting these permanent side effects have been suppressed. He’s the one trying to change the minds of the vast majority of the medical community, so he should be the one bringing forth irrefutable evidence that supports his viewpoint. It’s as simple as that.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I’ve been arguing this point for the last year as i’ve been involved in these discussions, and i’ve still not seen any evidence. I don’t expect to ever see any evidence because I do not believe Finasteride has caused the problems these men, includiing Jeremy, are currently experiencing.
I would also like to add that Daniel Knepshield persistently spreads false information about me and other victims of finasteride. Most recently, he refers to some false notion that I am basing my experiences on a nocturnal penile tumescence test (NPT) which he completely constructed out of nothing. I have never had this test mainly for the reasons he has mentioned, that it is not very helpful.
However, I have had proper neurological testing done and demonstrated that I have a pudendal neuropathy which causes both sensory and motor dysfunction in the genital tissues. While the test was expensive, I have spoken with several other Post-Finasteride-Syndrome patients who have pursued the test at my behest and they have all demonstrated similar results. Currently, there are only a handful of us who have undergone such testing but the tests has demonstrated there has been nerve damage done without a single exception in any of the tests. DK will continue to assert that PFS is a psychogenic illness, but these test results definitively prove he is full of rubbish.
Jeremy — Oh, and by the way, those “sources” that you gave to “prove” your claims about Merck simply refer to allegations made by the plaintiffs in a lawsuit. I do not consider them to be credible. Got anything else, of any real substance?
DK – You took my statement grossly out of context. When I said the test is reliable in determining whether ED is psychosomatic or physiological, there is no implication that the test is useful for determining any possible treatments or cures. It merely indicates that the problem is in fact physiological.
Secondly, you will not find any claim that I had an NPT test performed in that thread or elsewhere because it is not true. I hope the irony of you suggesting I am a liar is not lost on you.
Pudendal neuropathy is a real condition and has been diagnosed by medical practitioners. It typically requires sophisticated neuro-electrical equipment to diagnose.
Lastly, you didn’t read (or misread the links I posted). Here is an excerpt:
“The first fun thing to emerge in the Australian case is email documentation showing staff at Merck made a “hit list” of doctors who were critical of the company, or of the drug. This list contained words such as “neutralise”, “neutralised” and “discredit” next to the names of various doctors.”
“We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” said one email, from a Merck employee. Worse still, is the revelation that Merck paid the publisher Elsevier to produce a publication. (This line shows their involvement in the corruption of the research process)
LOL @Jeremy
You are right in pointing out that I misspoke and said NO is an amino acid but you were off point within the rest of your criticisms. If you want to deny reality (such as the role DHT plays in NO synthesis) that is your prerogative but denial of reality can cause you problems down the road. Since you seem predisposed to disbelieve any information I offer, I suggest doing a quick search on the connection between DHT and NO synthesis so you can personally corroborate that what I am saying is true.
I, for one, specifically remember Jeremy stating that he had an NPT test.
If the evidence is no longer there, it’s only because half of the comments are now deleted, for some reason, on those earlier threads. Anyone know what’s up with that?
The posts were not taken down. You can reread the URL that DK posted and you will see the context is completely continuous. If you would like, I invite you to check out the archives of the website where you can find a complete history of the blog at a website like WayBackMachine.com.
The two of you are completely wrong. NPT were discussed since DK erroneously thought that the way to test for psychosomatic ED was to be shot up with a dose of something like alprostadil. I mentioned back that and maintain today that the results of using an injection to generate an erection will tell you very little about the origin of ED unless there are severe vascular problems. However, with DK’s expertise in nursing, he continues to think he knows about topics which he has not bothered to research.
@Jeremy. Dude! You really are a troll! After this, I’m not even going to bother responding back to any more of your rubbish. Yes, the comments WERE taken down! Go look for yourself! On the post in question from back in March, that Daniel referred to, about 50 comments were deleted. Even so, I specifically remember you saying back then that you had an NPT test. It may not be there now, but it doesn’t change the fact that you still said it. I remember you saying it, and I’m sure others do as well. You can lie about it now all you want because, apparently, sometime between now and then, you did some more of your Googling and discovered that Daniel was right about it not being reliable, so you had to change your story.
Listen, people. Review the comments in THIS thread. If you do, you’ll see that Jeremy has clearly stated that the NPT test is NOT accurate (in agreement with Daniel [DK]). However, back in March, he clearly stated it was the most accurate test available! This proves that Jeremy is a liar and a troll. He makes stuff up as he goes along.
“I have no medical training of any kind, so I am not going to try and bluff my way around like you do. All I know is what I read.”
This statement is self contradictory and you continue to falsely assert facts and statements that didn’t exist. You don’t understand basic science nor seem to have a function ability in reading comprehension. I have stated that nocturnal erections stopped over time which demonstrates the onset of a physiological change. The NPT test you venerate is about as useful as a test used to measure whether a person is breathing or not. Sure it is reliable but not helpful. This is completely consistent with what I have always said but your reality distortion abilities are pretty strong.
I’m not going to respond to you any longer since you keep repeating the same lies and are not able to provide evidence to back up your claims, in an attempt to poison the well.
In sum – It has been clearly demonstrated that PFS has physiological origins. Ignoring the unnecessary distraction about the NPT test, the group of PFS patients have pursued neurological testing have shown neuropathy which in no way, shape, or form can be caused by psychogenic origins. Since PFS’ common detractors have liked to argue that the illness is psychogenic, this assertion has been decisively put to rest. If you would like to make a legitimate attempt to undermine the existence of PFS, you will now have to explain how neurogenic ED has appeared across a large group of men who have taken finasteride. This is very different from ED in general, since the neurologic form is much more rare than ED caused by excessive weight, smoking, diabetes, or psychogenic causes. The psychological argument is now completely moot.