Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

Posted by alan k on 1/04/02 at 08:47 (068660)

I would suggest that a story of a struggle over ESWT machines could be as problematic as anything on the message board, and should be avoided. Articles on the site in general, however, are the opposite: the more publicity the site gets as general foot pain information source and about how happy we all are and how charming the origins of the site are, the more of this the safer it is.

Please note that I am over-reacting, and some others are too, just to be on the safe side. Think of what it at stake: what if I never heard of Birkenstock sandals for pf-- where would I be now? Even resting my feet-- MY DOCTOR SAID IT WAS FINE TO STAY ACTIVE! Some info needs to be out there. ESWT can come second to that.

It seems like accepting paid links (perhaps not ads) with disclaimers that they do not represent the opinion of HLSPRS would be safer. The links could be sold on condition that Scott have veto power on certain statements for added safety.

Also, perhaps as a courtesy we should stop talking about this soon, however hypocritical it is to say that.

alan k

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

wendyn on 1/04/02 at 10:29 (068671)

Alan, I don't have a problem with Scott dropping the links if that's what's required - even any mention of it in his book or products etc.

BUT - I think it's awful that we're not supposed to 'discuss' it. That's different. Since when can someone tell you what you can and cannot discuss?

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

Scott R on 1/04/02 at 12:08 (068678)

Wendy, they haven't said we can't discuss it or that I was required to take any action. They just wanted me to tell them how I intended to comply with their regulations. But of course, that's just to give them a legal edge to cut me later on, if they decide that I need to be cut. My quote of their statement wasn't even on the web page when they sent the letter. Considering their methodology, I felt the only safe thing to do was over-react. But they have not replied and to give us permission to discuss it, either, meaning that they have not yet decided if they will allow us to have free speech.

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

Pauline on 1/04/02 at 12:51 (068684)

Question, Do the 6 physicians that own the machine use the actual 'O' word on their web sites when mentioning the ESWT treatment they offer or are their sites more generic just saying they offer ESWT for heel pain.

If they haven't put it in print on their sites, maybe that was part of the order issued to Norland when the FDA pulled the plug about sales and advertisement. Dr. Z did you or any of the other physicians receive a 'no direct advertising' or 'restriction on using the 'O' word' from Norland or the FDA on your personal sites or can the 6 of you specificly state you use the 'O' to treat Plantar Fasciitis?

Maybe they consider this site advertisement for Norland's machine too.

Re: so you yourself banned "0rbasone"?

elliott on 1/04/02 at 13:50 (068693)

I'd say that's a FOUL. :-)

Not sure a self-ban was the way to go about it. You struck a raw free-speech nerve with us here. And it sets a dangerous precedent. Now you're suggesting you can't lift the ban because they'll nail you for that too.

If the FDA is going to be totally unreasonable, they'll shut you down anyway (funny that you don't hestitate to say anything else bad about them, as long as you don't say big 'O'). A far more reasonable offer would have been your own refrain from using big 'O' on this site's advertising and the like.

Can't you send them another letter retracting the ban on our use of words but institute something like what I suggested? Please think about it.

Oh, one more thing:

0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone

Re: so you yourself banned "0rbasone"?

Dr. Zuckerman on 1/04/02 at 14:14 (068698)

In europe they call it the ossanol not the other word. So lets just call it the ossanal.

ossanal ossanol ossanol ossanol. You win elliott my fingers are too tired too keep tying.

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

wendyn on 1/04/02 at 10:29 (068671)

Alan, I don't have a problem with Scott dropping the links if that's what's required - even any mention of it in his book or products etc.

BUT - I think it's awful that we're not supposed to 'discuss' it. That's different. Since when can someone tell you what you can and cannot discuss?

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

Scott R on 1/04/02 at 12:08 (068678)

Wendy, they haven't said we can't discuss it or that I was required to take any action. They just wanted me to tell them how I intended to comply with their regulations. But of course, that's just to give them a legal edge to cut me later on, if they decide that I need to be cut. My quote of their statement wasn't even on the web page when they sent the letter. Considering their methodology, I felt the only safe thing to do was over-react. But they have not replied and to give us permission to discuss it, either, meaning that they have not yet decided if they will allow us to have free speech.

Re: about doing a story on speech troubles vs. advertising

Pauline on 1/04/02 at 12:51 (068684)

Question, Do the 6 physicians that own the machine use the actual 'O' word on their web sites when mentioning the ESWT treatment they offer or are their sites more generic just saying they offer ESWT for heel pain.

If they haven't put it in print on their sites, maybe that was part of the order issued to Norland when the FDA pulled the plug about sales and advertisement. Dr. Z did you or any of the other physicians receive a 'no direct advertising' or 'restriction on using the 'O' word' from Norland or the FDA on your personal sites or can the 6 of you specificly state you use the 'O' to treat Plantar Fasciitis?

Maybe they consider this site advertisement for Norland's machine too.

Re: so you yourself banned "0rbasone"?

elliott on 1/04/02 at 13:50 (068693)

I'd say that's a FOUL. :-)

Not sure a self-ban was the way to go about it. You struck a raw free-speech nerve with us here. And it sets a dangerous precedent. Now you're suggesting you can't lift the ban because they'll nail you for that too.

If the FDA is going to be totally unreasonable, they'll shut you down anyway (funny that you don't hestitate to say anything else bad about them, as long as you don't say big 'O'). A far more reasonable offer would have been your own refrain from using big 'O' on this site's advertising and the like.

Can't you send them another letter retracting the ban on our use of words but institute something like what I suggested? Please think about it.

Oh, one more thing:

0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone
0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone 0rbasone

Re: so you yourself banned "0rbasone"?

Dr. Zuckerman on 1/04/02 at 14:14 (068698)

In europe they call it the ossanol not the other word. So lets just call it the ossanal.

ossanal ossanol ossanol ossanol. You win elliott my fingers are too tired too keep tying.