Media Lies About Supplements, Media Lies About What Else?

Most of us on this board know that 99 percent of what you hear about supplements on the mainstream news and from government sources is utter bullshit.

If I listened to what some expert on CNN, the Surgeon General, or the American Medical Association, I would think that creatine and prohormones are as bad for you as crack or heroine.

I know the realities of supplements, so when I hear stuff like this, I think “bullshit”, and "I can’t believe people actually believe this. . "

To those of you who believe we should be in Iraq:

How do you know that what the government tells you about U.S. foreign policy isn’t as chock full of lies and half truths as what they tell you about supplements?

Obviously supplements and foreign policy are divergent topics, but I’m curious: what makes you think they would be so horribly inaccurate about one topic and yet accurate about something else?


uhhh, wouldnt that also apply to those who think we shouldnt be in iraq?

Yes, it would apply to all sides of any issue.

Let me offer an example of what I’m getting at:

Lets say I turned on the T.V. and the surgeon general was telling me that this product called “Hot-Rox” was:

“dangerous, ineffective and that the FDA needs to send its agents down to the Biotest headquarters to seize and destroy it!!! And while their at it, they should occupy the place so none of the “Luoma-Patterson” regime gets back in control. Why those two have been posioning their own athletes, dont you know!!!”

If I didn’t know better, I would thing:

“Gee, he’s the surgeon general. If he says this stuff is baaaad for me, and that the FDA needs to spend tons of money to bust down Biotest’s doors and occupy the place he’s probably right. Go get em, FDA!!! Support the FDA!!!”

Without knowing anything about Hot-Rox, I might begin to question the good Dr’s assertion when I find out that he had been employed by a pharmaceutical company poised to make a ton of money off their own weight loss drug.

I would REALLY begin to ask some serious questions if I found out he proposed the invasion of Biotest when Hot-Rox started eating into his company’s profits.

I wouldn’t necessarily assume he was biased and just making the claim for his own profit, but I would really, really wander . . .

Regarding the War in Iraq: its quite possible the legislators oppossing it are the ones lying. However they are overwhelmingly in the minority. (none of the democrat pres candidates who have a realistic chance of winning propose we withdraw)

Since were sending 130,000 troops and 87 billion dollars, I’m much more concerned about the creidibility of those claiming we should be there than the handfull who didn’t want us there at all and want us out now.

Agains, my idea applies to both sides, but given who currently controls the presidency, and both house of congresses, there the ones I"m concerend about right now. If the demos win things back, I’ll be skeptical of anything they tell me too.


I think the media have decided that they should ‘encourage’ the American people to believe a certain way for the greater good. This includes the following:

  • Unqualified support for Israel (and disregarding their atrocities against the Palestininan people) to the point of demonizing Arabs.

  • Steroids are ‘bad’.

  • Drugs are ‘bad’.

  • Guns are ‘bad’, and gun control is ‘good’.

  • Unfettered illegal immigration is ‘good’, as it brings us greater diversity, and only a ‘bigot’ would disagree with this.

It’s wise to pay attention to what the media push, because they have agendas.

But who in the media controls or decides these agendas?

and for what purposes?

I think looking at who owns what media corporation & what ties they have to other industries would be a good start.

Why does say, BBC coverage often differ radically from FOX (to use an extreme example)?

Bill Moyers is addressing this very topic tonight on his PBS show - the influence of media on democracy.

In other words how recent trends in media is rather un-democratic.