FOOT HEALTH FORUM Login as administrator
 Subject: RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker
 
Author: Bernie Secoura
Date:   3/20/2005 9:20 am PDT


Dr. S. Arbes wrote:
-------------------------------
Gentlemen:
I don't recall how I found this forum, but I thought it was a rather good idea to have a place for patients to ask questions and, perhaps, receive some "free" professional advice.
I still think it's a good idea.
I do not think this is the place for us to be debating this "dirty laundry" issue.
Dr. S. Arbes
==========================
I believe that you have correctly framed the MIS issue as the "dirty laundry" of podiatry, and that's all the more reason to bring this issue before the patient public who has traditionally had a history of general trust in those of the medical professions. As with all healing professions there are professionals who base their patient care on proven science, and there are salesmen who, for propietary gain, attempt to convince the unsuspecting and the uninformed that something that is too good to be true, indeed IS. This is never the case, no matter how slick might be the sales pitch. One of the most-employed techniques in the "selling" of forms of alternative medicine and alternative procedures is referencing what appears to be basic logic, which, though it might seem to the non-scientist be right on the mark, simply rarely applies to medicne or science in general. To wit . . The bowel-cleansing scam promoted many years ago by Dr. Kellogg and which to some degree is still promulgated today. Add to this the "cleansing" of the blood products, and many other scams which may sound logically helpful, but simply are not. These MIS salesmen are, in deed, often the direct descendents of the snake oil/medicine show salesmen of the past and the modern public has a right to know them for whom they are.

So if dirty laundry is what one has, in an honest discussion, dirty laundry is what should be exposed.
Reply To This Message

 Topics Author  Date      
 MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Capote 3/6/2005 2:03 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Zuckerman 3/8/2005 10:04 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. S. Arbes 3/17/2005 11:50 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/17/2005 6:51 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/12/2005 1:11 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/12/2005 2:17 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 6:11 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/13/2005 7:09 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 9:49 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/13/2005 12:49 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. S. Arbes 3/19/2005 9:28 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker    
Bernie Secoura 3/20/2005 9:20 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 3:53 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/13/2005 5:22 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 6:27 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/13/2005 8:26 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 9:13 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/13/2005 10:11 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 10:27 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Bernie Secoura 3/14/2005 12:46 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Jay 3/13/2005 3:57 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Daniel Tucker, DPM, FACFAS 3/21/2005 11:54 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Capote 3/21/2005 11:13 pm PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Daniel J. Tucker, DPM, FACFAS 3/27/2005 9:16 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Capote 3/29/2005 0:12 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Capote 4/6/2005 7:02 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. Capote 4/6/2005 7:03 am PDT
 RE: MIS & Dr. Daniel Tucker   new  
Dr. R. Westheimer 4/28/2005 6:45 am PDT
 Reply To This Message
 Your Name:  
 Your Email:  
 Subject:  
  Submission Validation Question: What is 86 + 59? *  
* indicates required field