Comments on: Science, and Scientists, Dissonance, and Attribution http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/ communication for a change Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:09:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: TBTAM http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-11 Thu, 11 Jan 2007 03:37:19 +0000 http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-11 Thanks. Being able to comment and correct the impression was all I needed. Happy blogging! Thanks. Being able to comment and correct the impression was all I needed. Happy blogging!

]]> by: drsbb http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-5 Mon, 08 Jan 2007 07:00:37 +0000 http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-5 Hello, Blog Who Ate Manhatten: I'm glad you found this post and have commented upon it. I hope that this creates more readership for your original posting. I also appreciate your restraint in the face of my strong criticisms of the medical community. You did present a balanced and nuanced view of the issue and I clearly glossed over the details of your multiple post blog on this topic. My drum banging was aimed at one large goal (external attribution to Pharmas) and it only took the positive evidence in your posts and ignored the negative evidence (your reflections on the medical community's ill considered use of HRT). If you think I've veered too strongly, please suggest how I might more accurately express this. I don't wish to mislead readers about your ideas while attempting to express my own perspective. Hello, Blog Who Ate Manhatten:

I’m glad you found this post and have commented upon it. I hope that this creates more readership for your original posting.

I also appreciate your restraint in the face of my strong criticisms of the medical community. You did present a balanced and nuanced view of the issue and I clearly glossed over the details of your multiple post blog on this topic. My drum banging was aimed at one large goal (external attribution to Pharmas) and it only took the positive evidence in your posts and ignored the negative evidence (your reflections on the medical community’s ill considered use of HRT).

If you think I’ve veered too strongly, please suggest how I might more accurately express this. I don’t wish to mislead readers about your ideas while attempting to express my own perspective.

]]> by: TBTAM http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-4 Sun, 07 Jan 2007 02:29:46 +0000 http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/2007/01/01/science-and-scientists-dissonance-and-attribution/#comment-4 Great post, this. I'm surprised, though, that you read my posts on HRT to imply that pharma alone was responsible for the widespread use of HRT prior to the WHI. I thought I did a pretty good job of spreading the responsibility around, particularly when I talk about the simple mindedness of the medical community's approach both before and after the WHI. Oh, well. Great post, this.

I’m surprised, though, that you read my posts on HRT to imply that pharma alone was responsible for the widespread use of HRT prior to the WHI. I thought I did a pretty good job of spreading the responsibility around, particularly when I talk about the simple mindedness of the medical community’s approach both before and after the WHI.

Oh, well.

]]>