Author Topic: Marilyn Shits-- I mean SCHLITZ  (Read 3187 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline skidoo

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5881
Marilyn Shits-- I mean SCHLITZ
« on: March 12, 2007, 05:25:42 PM »
(Episodes 85 and 39.)

I'm trying to figure out the cash angle on Marilyn Schlitz, but I'm coming up empty (like, that's cheap for woo-woo).

Is she sincerely deluded? I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this chick.

Offline wallet55

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • 3 feet under the Salmon River
what's not to get?
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2007, 05:53:10 PM »
"Director of Research at the Institute of Noetic Sciences and Senior Scientist at the Complementary Medicine Research Institute at the California Pacific Medical Center"

excuse me? what is not to get about that?? CAM is a scam, but there is good money in it. (and i work at a highly CAM ranked cancer center) embarrassing but true.
Humankind cannot stand very much reality.   T. S. Eliot

Offline skidoo

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5881
Re: what's not to get?
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2007, 06:16:59 PM »
Quote from: "wallet55"
"Director of Research at the Institute of Noetic Sciences and Senior Scientist at the Complementary Medicine Research Institute at the California Pacific Medical Center"

excuse me? what is not to get about that?? CAM is a scam, but there is good money in it.

Really? Good money? How so? I'm just genuinely curious.

Quote
(and i work at a highly CAM ranked cancer center) embarrassing but true.

I hear ya. My ex was an oncology nurse (BSN) for some time, and she had to politely listen to all sorts of horseshit, much of it actively endorsed by hospital policies and practices. I think she sort of resolved it by seeing it as society's way of going the extra mile to support palliative efforts. Sort of circumspect relief for social guilt maybe? Like, even if the "effects" are placebo, as long as they don't interfere with real science.... But the problem is that last bit, I suppose.

Offline skidoo

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5881
Marilyn Shits-- I mean SCHLITZ
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2007, 06:34:53 PM »
Oh man. Her middle name is Mandala.  :roll:

Offline wallet55

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
  • 3 feet under the Salmon River
real meds and CAM
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2007, 09:21:59 PM »
I have seen ambivalence towards CAM, generally rotating around three central themes/rationalizations.
1) There is skepticism even bordering on impatience at the waste of time, but tempered by the palliative care guilt you mentioned. Generally speaking resistance to CAM goes down as the case gets more hopeless
2) there is interest at the molecular level to some of the chemical pathways that some subclinical results indicate. That is to say, they think that while nuts and berries won't do anything, some of the things they have observed from these things could be turned (through wholly artificial and therefore unacceptable methodologies to the CAM crowd, who will decry the big pharama's use of their turf) into real cures
3) Money. Lots of it. There are big grants being given out for CAM. (or were, all grant funding is being cut right now, lets hope CAM absorbs most of he shock) Most of the researchers I know focus on the pathways, or use CAM to help keep their infrastructure going while they do their "real" research. A very few, who one should give wide berth, as with this individual, are completely into CAM. Some of their fellow researchers view them as failed scientists, others as truly deluded.

A few are honest about the situation. With that much money on the table, one told me, it is inevitable that some good scientists would get sucked into  wasting their careers.

It is like cocaine. throw that much addictive drug around, and most come away ok, if not a little shaky, but you do lose good folks.
Humankind cannot stand very much reality.   T. S. Eliot