Saturday, August 30, 2014


I will be adding to this post.

I read Tweets! I still will not buy followers. I am not the least bit interested in doing so. Fake followers can have profiles, often duplicated ones but they do not generate more followers, they just fill space. 

Fraud in content does far worse than fill space, it is dangerous! And fraud is everywhere on the Internet, especially about food and health. Eating some food raw like veggies is great. Some veggies are better for you cooked like tomato (technically a fruit), and none cure cancer. Everyone makes mistakes. Fraud is not a mistake when it is repeated over and over again. That is deliberate, and it cannot be covered up with fake, or any followers. No amount of fake followers, paid testimonials, marketing, screaming "religious" rhetoric, or recruitment can undo the fraud that they contain.

There are plenty of famous and not famous vegetarians who have died of cancer. A balanced diet is best with a variety of real food choices, minus all fraud about the choices. Fraud is much more insidious than religious, or ideological extremism. It is based purely on greed without any trace of humanity, no matter how pleasant its face. Fraud is always costly in money, and in lives. Greed combined with the lies of fraud kill people.

You cannot buy health! NO crystal, "vibration", homeopathy as examples can replace reputable, needed medicines, or vaccines. No herb, honey, supplement(s), or food can treat, cure, or prevent all disease, or illness. Such examples of fraud stating otherwise are fantasies of a past that NEVER existed, does not exist now except in lies. Reputable medicines, and vaccines must be affordable, and reach ALL who need them. 

"Weasel Words", 2015, @ScienceBasedMed
stone medicine is nonsense, complete and total, divorced from all realty.

"Crystal Healing: Stone-Cold Facts About Gemstone Treatments", 2015, color and bolding added by me, @LiveScience 

"Scientifically speaking, there is no evidence that crystal healing can be used to cure diseases, because diseases have never been found to be the result of a so-called energy flow in the body. ... no scientific studies have shown that crystals and gems can be differentiated by chemical composition or color to treat a particular ailment." While crystal healing can be a placebo, the risk other than the safety of a stone, is in delaying, or abandoning qualified needed medical care. 

"crystal power", updated 2015, color and bolding added by me

"Crystals ... used not only for physical healing, but for emotional problems as well ... emotional healing ... self-expression, creativity, meditation, and the immune system. None of these claims is backed by any scientific evidence."

"Mouse magic, or How lab mice learned to stop worrying and trust the healing energy", 2015, bolding added by me, @oracknows 
"I frequently call homeopathy The One Quackery to Rule Them All ... not so sure ... that’s the case ... another ...“energy medicine ... a specialty so ridiculous ... 11-year-old girl could show ... TT practitioners cannot detect “human energy fields,” much less manipulate them ... also appalling that money was spent on this that could have been used in real cancer research." "11-year old girl" - Emily Rosa"

"Trick or Treatment?", 2008, Professor Edzard Ernst @EdzardErnst and Dr Simon Singh @SLSingh, color and bolding added by me
"healer then had to sense Emily Rosa's energy field to decide where she had placed her hand ... Emily was only nine years old when she conducted this experiment ... two years later she wrote up her research ... published in ... Journal of the American Medical Association ... nobody has ever come up with an experiment that has overturned her findings.

And Placebos, bolding added by me 
1. 2015, Cost bias
study abstract
2. 2010, Placebo effects, @ScienceBasedMed
Quote from link 1. "dopamine release is increased by belief, novelty, and the expectation of reward - mental states that underlie placebo effects"
Quote from link 2. "There is a measured benefit for some subjective outcomes ... due to trial design (and therefore bias) rather than a real effect. ... Placebo medicine is a sham. And any potential placebo benefit worth having can be fully realized with science-based interventions." 
The second quote makes particular sense. Bias or expectation can relieve symptoms but not affect the actual illness or disease, where real treatment can treat, or cure it. Placebos aside from being shams or scams are costly - usually expensive, and when they fail to have long lasting (real) effects - can cause devastation.

Any cosmetic "intended for a therapeutic use" as stated here (FDA, updated 2016), as well as in other countries is considered to be a drug, and it is subject to drug regulations.

Signs of new and pending sales on a website promoting health fraud - an increase in obvious fake followers, other fakery e.g. fake or paid for "reviews", everything but reputable evidence for what is shilled! On Twitter but some can also apply to other social media, examples of obvious fake followers: many old eggheads, many locked accounts, irrelevant content, duplicated profiles, no profiles. 

Reputable evidence, sound science, and the truth defeat fraud every single time! 

Email Reply: "You can watch bought or fake followers being added ... just click on followers ... there is gap where real followers should be ... refresh and view the bought or fakes added.", December 8, 2014 

Fascinating! The "system" is not foolproof, lol.

Don't be fooled by quack "followers", most are bought fakes. I watched one quack adding 30 at once, Tweeted the observation and now they add them slowly. They will still add them in spurts - not usually unless I have hit home well (ones that read me), and many of the fakes have 0 account relevance.

Email Reply: added fakes

I was told about it before - observed the same thing (later) during the Twitter experiment adding "Following" - gap - then more there. I was initially confused by what I saw - not the results - included an email here and observed it myself again. I wondered about the process - why I reached out to ask about it and included the response in this blog post (above). I had not wanted or was given more details.

Email Reply: added fakes 

From what I have observed and been told - you can arrange the fakes any way you want - so they can be "inserted". I have 0 desire to learn the process, no interest. I just wanted to understand what I was seeing - not just results (higher numbers).

I watched the Twitter experiment where "Following" was added and "insertion" - confirmed. "Following" accounts (I had not Followed) were not in any order. I have no doubt the process is similar with other social media. You can Google and buy many things e.g. YouTube views, comments, and subscriptions.

Email Reply: Testimonials
Friends/family? Loyalty questionable. Paid - like "real" bought followers - paid to say what is wanted - still fake!

Email Reply: Scams

Agreed - the only thing worse than the fraud is a scammer using "I have or had a hard life, or time" in an attempt to gain sympathy. Many scammers use sympathy bids to distract you from the fact that what they are doing is fraud, or endangering you as well as have you waste your money! A lot of fraud is based on eliciting just the "right" emotional response to enable the fraud to succeed unimpeded.

The following quack "mantras" you can find A LOT online on numerous social media platforms, including Twitter.

"More Ploys That Can Fool You", 2014, bolding added by me
"To gain your allegiance it is not necessary to persuade you that all of the statements below are true. Just one may be enough to hook you ... quackery is organized ... unlike members of the scientific community, quacks rarely criticize their own methodology or that of their colleagues."
"We really care about you!" "No side effects" "We treat medicine's failures." "Think positive!" "Time-tested" or "Used for centuries!" "Take charge of your health!" "Health freedom" and "If only you had come earlier." This phrase is handy when the treatment fails. It encourages patients and their survivors not to face the fact that consulting the quack was a mistake." 

And Related

"WHAT A CON ARTIST LOOKS FOR IN A SCAM VICTIM", color and bolding added by me 
"Con artists choose you very carefully. They are only interested in those people who can be turned around to believe in them without question ... They seek out the needy"
A nonprofit organization - See top corner, left-hand side of page.

A Facebook sympathy bid scam, 2013
"Facebook 'farming' scam preys on sympathy to garner 'likes,' money"

"Does Twitter verification still mean anything?", 2013 -The quote below verified what I thought from the questions I was asked, based on what people had observed. bolding added by me
"There are a handful of sites where users have had their handles priced, and you can browse for one with the badge that you can then take over and make your own." No thank you to any of that, too!

Quack signs on Twitter 
The list below is meant to be taken as a whole. All points are applicable and most are usually present. The list is not inclusive. Quacks also use other social media the same ways - See this blog post.
1. 0 reputable evidence (for all health claims)
2. No Tweets in a while and or only about them or products they promote
3. Only Retweets about them
4. Increased followers (fakes) after evidence questions
5. Really bad advice (0 reputable evidence for all of it too)
6. Following plus promoting other quack information 
7. Not crediting non-quack ideas, information NOT their own but presented as theirs
8. Arrogance
9. Incompetence in the limited research they do resulting in further lies, misinformation 
10. Painfully obvious paid for fake positive reviews, comments e.g. "You are an inspiration"
11. Quacks love to discuss "toxins" as a topic of their pseudoscience but not the toxicity of what they promote, or ANY serious, needed cautions. 
12. Increased obvious paid for fake followers despite no recent Tweets, or Retweets (a number of which are also obvious fakes - no replies to their contrived positive comments but quick replies to others, or no replies at all) 
13. Increased obvious paid for fake followers, comments despite "inactivity" - no Tweets, 
or Retweets ("inactive" quacks)
14. Obvious fake followers with 0 relation or relevance to the topics Tweeted about

Not even the Paris terrorist attacks drew "inactive" quacks I watch out of hiding online writing self-praise, and more - "well" but "busy" according to family - to show they care for any real fans left! Quacks specialize in "caring" - their primary manipulation - as bogus as their paid for self-written delivered comments, Followers, reviews, and "remedies"! 

There is NO SUCH THING as a benign quack - direct/indirect harm can cause death. No "silly"/"playful" rhetoric can change that. Quacks are dangerous! Quacks are health terrorists often killing, torturing helpless children, Islamic terrorists want to scour the earth - both are heinous to me! 

Quacks, ISIS and their ilk - share yet another thing in common - fear mongering! DON'T let them play you! A quackery example - See first link and quoted text.

2009 - background on "toxins", bolding added by me

"Toxins”: the new evil humours", @ScienceBasedMed
"fundamental premise ... in “alternative” health is that we are swimming in a world of “toxins” and those “toxins” are causing disease. Like most premises in “alternative” health it has no basis in scientific fact; makes intuitive sense only if you are ignorant of medicine, science and statistics; and speaks to primitive fears and impulses."

The safety of personal data is a real concern for people these days, especially on social media. Is your personal data safe with a quack? Not a chance in my opinion. Quack companies often do free giveaways to their mostly fake subscribers, or followers, so your personal information can be used! A few people may receive their free goods, and the rest? The REAL bonus is to the quacks - harvested personal information. THAT is why a number of the free goods are "donated" - your information - gets shared! Most social media is about business. That is fine. Privacy concerns should center on with whom we do any sort of "business". 

Yes, there is social media surveillance - as there should be to a degree, and with abuse issues a lot more needs to be done. What I am saying is you need to be very selective with whom you do business even when no business appears to be happening. People get deceived into thinking their personal information or data is safe when in fact it is shared, and probably shared again. If one continuously gives misinformation, and lies like quacks or scammers do, they often do other unscrupulous or illegal things too. Being online for quite a while has only cost me - what I am willing to pay for, not more.