Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2008;336:776 (5 April), doi:10.1136/bmj.39535.585579.59
Liam Farrell, general practitioner, Crossmaglen, County Armagh
William.Farrell@528.gp.n-i.nhs.uk
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
A few years ago I felt compelled (out of both a sense of duty and a feeling of nausea) to chide the Independent about its complementary health guru. "Oooh, but hes very popular," was the newspapers defence. So is pornography, I said. "Oooh no," they replied, in an outraged tone, "that wouldnt be ethical," though I reckoned that big tits on page 3 is a lot more ethical than snake oil salesmen peddling the illusion of knowledge to the gullible and the vulnerable.
But if even a newspaper as pretentious and worthily dull as the Independent can be trying to court the favour of the lumpen proletariat, then there is a lesson for all of us.
Every quarter someone (I dont know who, some anonymous benefactor who thinks I should be bettering myself) sends me the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin. As I am sometimes a good doctor, I read
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+