Prime time live

[johnnyawe]

I will never watch ABC again.

They made Randi look like a jerk. On purpose.

I hate ABC.

 

[Chocolate Chip]

For anyone who missed it, all that was shown of Randi's interview was the comment:
"There are no greater liars in the world than quacks, except, for their patients. Remember, these people have gone for this kind of bizarre treatment. If they have to admit no, I'm not helped by this, I was swindled, they have to say I was pretty damn stupid to go in there and think that sticking something up my nose was going to cure my back". (Direct quotes compliments of TiVo)

Johnnyawe:

They made Randi look like a jerk. On purpose.

I agree. Think of it, here they are showing these poor people desperately searching for solutions to their illnesses, some life threatening. Out of all the footage of interview they could have used from Randi, they choose those comments. Let's face it, they made Randi look downright MEAN. In the context of the show, Randi is calling these poor people liars and stupid. Quite a peice of manipulation on ABC's part, and a nice little peice of marketing for the woo side.

 

[johnnyawe]

Excerpt from my letter to ABC:

I also wonder if you didn't use some creative editing to make Randi appear to be an evil person. You introduce Randi by showing him, seemingly in mid-sentence, saying the words "...there are no worse liars than quacks — except for their patients." This quote is not a Randi-ism as you make it appear, but it is in fact a quote by Benjamin Franklin, and I suspect that Randi began the sentence by saying "Benjamin Franklin said..". But you decided to cut out that part because it would have lended an air of credibility to the statement, and you also wanted Randi to come off as a smug old man who thinks all sick people are idiots.

...

Did that actually happen or did I just dream it, or did I miss something?

Full letter available on my website.

 

[JPK]

Good morning all

I wanted to see the show but missed it. Seems that it is good that I did. However from what I have read here it sounds like what I was expecting.
Sad really.

JPK

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Nemo said:
One thing I noticed. The "healer" brought the two women in together for their "visible" surgeries. The woman with the allergies had her breast cut and the woman with the breast cancer got her nose reamed. He must have got them crossed, not that it mattered what he did to them.

My wife noticed that immediately. Pretty amusing.

The show was a giant 1-hour ad for John of God. Feh.

~~ Paul

 

[Orangutan]

Another approach,

Thank prime time live ( netaudr@abc.com ) for thier program.

Tell them how your doctor had told you that you need to start some pretty agressive chemotherapy for your cancer and you have been worried sick about the side effects. But thanks to thier program, which you see as a message from God, you have cancelled your treatment, and against the advice of your spouse and children you have decided to travel to see John Of God who you now belive will be able to cure you of your cancer with no side effects.



Hmm thinking about it, I doubt after the performace last night many of them have consciences big enought to tug at.
----------------------------------

I was also really bugged by the reporters glib comments that he didn't stick to the requirments of no sex, no pork, no pepper. to paraphrase: "hehhehhe guess wich one I was getting tons of ladies and gentle men".

He gave anyone who might of otherwise been disuaded a straw to clutch at.

I don't have a good word to say about any of them.

O.

 

[voodoochile]

Another approach,

Thank prime time live ( netaudr@abc.com ) for thier program.

Tell them how your doctor had told you that you need to start some pretty agressive chemotherapy for your cancer and you have been worried sick about the side effects. But thanks to thier program, which you see as a message from God, you have cancelled your treatment, and against the advice of your spouse and children you have decided to travel to see John Of God who you now belive will be able to cure you of your cancer with no side effects.

Then wait a few months and write again telling them you are now dying and feel they are at least partially at fault and are contacting a lawyer to see if you have legal recourse against them for perpetrating medical hoaxes.

 

[Larry Barrieau]

I just (10 sec. ago) finished talking to one of my classes about the program. I didn't see it but one of the girls in class did and she told the class what it was about.

She described the woman faith healer and said that Randi was only on for a few seconds. The class asked if she was like Benny Hinn or Peter Popoff (they remembered from the Secrets of the Psychics video) The girl said she was kind of the same but stuck something up someones nose and caused it to bleed. After they discussed it among themselves I asked what they thought of it. Most thought that it must be fake and that the people who went to her must be desperate. They also remembered our discussion of Phillipine psychic surgery and how those people were also desperate.

Over all, I was quite proud of them. Quite a few of them remembered stuff and had some thoughtful input.

 

[kittynh]

Thanks Larry! I wish ALL teachers would do this.

I almost cried at the woman from South Africa. The thing is she COULD be cured. I wondered at her family and friends . Why didn't they stage and intervention? Why didn't they sit her down and let her know she would not be going through this alone, that they would be with her every step of the way? Maybe they did.

But they could have had her doctor on and let him at least say what HIS opinion was. Or they could have had the doctor of the guy with the brain tumor on. He would have said, "while this is rare it is not unknown"

Then the woman with the ALMOST severed spinal cord. As soon as my husband and I heard that we said, "Oh, that sounds like our friend Mark (another Mark, not my husband)" Mark fell off a ladder and ALMOST severed his spinal cord. He spent years getting very special physical therapy at some of the best rehab places in the US. He still works on it constantly. He can walk as well as that young woman was. If you remember, they said she had "trouble getting out of her wheelchair".

Mark now can walk (though he has balance problems) with a special cane that is meant to help with his BALANCE PROBLEM. I called Mark up, he saw the show and said that with this same style cane (it has 4 tips that help balance you) this woman could probably walk too. He thought she was a total fraud, probably being paid by the psycho doctor, and that sure enough in a few months she'd probably be walking (with a cane). The old con game of putting someone that CAN walk in a wheelchair.

Why didn't they check with any local physicians or hospitals? theywould certainly get an earfull, or not as I guess the guy brings in lots of money. I'm willing to bet that if they investigated his past, instead of just taking his word for it, they would find many interesting things also.

I was so heartbroken. When my friend Fran the fundie was dying, she earned my respect by her willingness to fight, and her acceptance of what came. She made her peace with her family, her friends, she was so strong she made us strong. And to see this travesty. It insults faith. It insults Christianity. It insults everyone that truly believes in both a God and modern medicine.

This man is so wicked. Sorry guys, I'm holding onto being a Christian for a little while longer just so I can picture this guy roasting in hell. I'd like to shove somthing somewhere on him.....

 

[kittynh]

Oh and where were the CHILDREN? If he had shown images of children being kept from medical care to see this guy, just imagine it. I couldn't figure out did he not treat children or what?


and why doesnt he treat children? I'll bet the government DA had something to say about that.

 

[delphi_ote]

Oh and where were the CHILDREN? If he had shown images of children being kept from medical care to see this guy, just imagine it. I couldn't figure out did he not treat children or what?


and why doesnt he treat children? I'll bet the government DA had something to say about that.

The show stated that Mr. of God only conducts his "surgery" on people over the age of 18... and essentially nobody with a real demonstrable incurable illness (can't be in a wheelchair, can't be taking chemo...) The government probably has something to say about all the things he does, because they're illegal (surgery without a medical license, which is what he CLAIMS to do.)

Mr. of God probably just doesn't want the bad publicity videotapes of him abusing children and the disabled might bring.

The stipulation that you cannot be on any kind of harsh, toxic treatment (because it interrupts the vibes? He never even had to come up wtih an excuse for that one...) makes me wonder if anyone would give up their treatments for this quackery. That's a very scary thought.

 

[VicDaring]

[cross post]


I think we may be giving the average person too little credit.

Here's what ABC showed:
A: woman who said she felt bad
B: guy with ALS
C: chick in a wheelchair
D: guy with a brain tumor
E: actress with breast cancer

Out of those, the results are

A: Says she feels better - Whatever. No comment really.

B: No progress - None expected. I feel bad for this guy and his family. Their collective desperation was palpable.

C: Still in wheelchair - Tried to claim some progress, but I happen to know a little bit about SCI (Spinal Cord Injury). A lot depends on what level her injury was and how complete and all that but, to put it simply, she's still crippled.

D: tumor shrunk, but still present - Out of these, the only sort of "hit" is maybe this guy. And he had a month of chemo after he was diagnosed. Did that kill the tumor?

E: dying of cancer - And dying needlessly. "I feel like something has changed in my body." Yeah sweetheart, it's being eaten away by cancer. Get treatment before it's too late.


All of this was right there on the show and I don't think one needs to be a card carrying skeptic to see that these aren't very promising results at all.

 

[Brown]

The show was bad, but not as bad as many have said.

The biggest problem with it, as far as I could see, was that the material that was presented suggesting that this dude might be a phony was de-emphasized.

Item: The nature of the "patients'" condition was based almost solely upon their stories about what their doctors told them. What some of these patients say their doctors told them are the kinds of things competent doctors do not say. (It is very common for patients to misremember what their doctors said, or to miss nuances that physicians go out of their way to emphasize.) We didn't hear the doctors' prognoses from the doctors themselves.

Item: Some people did not experience any effect, objective or subjective. Of course, there was always an "out": the "patients" weren't in the proper frame of mind, or they ate pepper, or something stupid like that.

Item: For some inexplicable reason, the healing power of the Almighty didn't work for some classes of "patients." If the reporter swallowed that, then he failed to realize that he was sitting on one of the biggest news stories of all time: "God is not omnipotent!"

Item: Those that did experience an objective effect could not scientifically show causation. The patients themselves attributed causation (of course!), but even Dr. Oz wishy-washied around the issue.

Item: Dr. Oz spoke in terms of probabilities, as did the reporter. Things like: This type of tumor is usually aggressive, or Maybe the tumor burned itself out (a phenomenon that is not unknown in medical circles). The manner of presentation, however, implied that these probabilities were virtual certainties. Were weren't told the probabilities of non-miraculous recovery, or rates of remission, success rates with conventional therapies. And a lot of Dr. Oz's remarks were chock full of speculation, the kind of thing he would never tell a patient (unless he wanted to be hauled before the medical licensing board).

Item: Dr. Oz wouldn't send his patients to Brazil. This point was made parenthetically.

Item: Every attempt by the reporter to track down a truly miraculous healing failed. This was downplayed, however, by saying that the reports were "anecdotal."

Item: This "John" dude is whale excrement, the lowest of the low, preying on the hopes of people who are desperate. His remarks invoked "God" at every turn, which is the hallmark of a religious con man. (Ordained ministers do not invoke the Almighty or divine mystery that often!) When asked whether he personally profited, he turned on the water works, in a pitiful display of bad acting. Criticisms were mentioned, but were simply brushed aside and not followed up.

Item: The quote from Mr. Randi, although brief, was a pretty good quote. But, as others have suggested, chances are that his interview included far more interesting insights and more pertinent quotable material.

Item: The whole report lacked the elements of a serious investigation. The bulk of the report was based upon what people said, and nothing more. There were few documents presented, almost no follow-up to key points, and often no first-hand witnesses.

Bottom line: "60 Minutes" became popular by shining the light on scams and swindlers, exposing them for the phonies that they were. "Primetime" had the opportunity to do the same thing here, and blew it big time. What was the theme of this hour-long report? "This guy claims to be able to work miracles with the help of the Almighty... can he really do it? Maybe he can't, maybe he can; but if he can, WOW!"

(Here's a link to the Primetime web site story.)

(Edited to add: The ABC web site story fails to mention--you guessed it!--James Randi. An even WORSE sin, in my judgment, is that the web site lists various other web sites under the notation: "To learn more about John of God and the people in this story, you may wish to visit the following Web sites...." The JREF website is not listed. I am considering writing to ABC to ask them to consider adding randi.org to this list of web sites.)

 

[delphi_ote]

[cross post]
I think we may be giving the average person too little credit.

Even if the "average" person could see through this (and I'm not content to concede that point yet,) it's not fair to let this slide. Millions of people are duped by these types of things over and over. Even if we assume a normal distribution of intelligence, and that everyone above the mean (or even 1 or 2 standard deviations below the mean) sees this for a fraud, that still leaves far too many vulnerable. There are a lot of irrational people in the world. ABC just fueled their irrational beliefs by putting the weight of a major news outlet behind the premise that "science has no explaination" for Mr. of God.

Homework assignment: go into your local Walmart sometime. Spend about 2 hours there. If you're brave, ask the people there about faith healers or other woo subjects. It'll help give you a sense of my perspective.

 

[jmercer]

I doubt that there's any real hope of broadcast networks presenting the skeptical point of view with any kind of fairness in the near-term future, and this is an excellent example. Forget about "balanced and fair" reporting. You have to follow the money.

Have you noticed how they've handled the Creationism & Evolutionary debate with same kind of slant toward the Creationists?

Fundamentalism is currently enjoying a world-wide upsurge, particularly in the USA. Viewers are increasingly addicted to fantasy shows based on psychic and supernatural premises. This has not gone unnoticed in the hallowed halls of television networks.

At the same time, broadcast networks are losing viewers to premium cable & satellite channels at an alarming rate. The implementation of HDTV globally is driving up their costs in the meantime. The bottom line is that ABC, NBC and CBS are no longer concerned about anything other than retaining viewers and fighting for ratings - it's simply a matter of survival for them.

 

[kittynh]

The bottom line is that ABC, NBC and CBS are no longer concerned about anything other than retaining viewers and fighting for ratings - it's simply a matter of survival for them. [/B]

That has been a poor excuse through out history.

Think WWII.

My grandmother, a Christian, once told me that evil isn't personified in someone like Hitler. Evil is that little voice inside so many people that allowed Hitler to come to and hold onto power.

I think we are right to focus on the fact that it is ABC that is guilty here of the bigger crime. (in my opinion).

John of God is a bad dude. But he's just one man. ABC gave this man access to millions.

 

[jmercer]

I agree, kittynh. It's about the saddest excuse for compromising the truth I can imagine - it's contemptible, dishonest and unethical, to say the least.

Having said that, I'm pretty sure that's what's actually happening - because it's been the general paradigm for years. NBC/CBS/ABC are catering to their viewing audience. If the viewing audience were repulsed by such nonsense and were only watching PBS-type shows, then the networks would begin carrying PBS-type shows and debunking this garbage.

 

[prewitt81]

McFeeley

Sorry if this has been said in one of the other threads already, but am I the only one that noticed the groping of all the female patients' chests, regardless of the ailment they said they had?

 

[FFed]

Re: McFeeley

Sorry if this has been said in one of the other threads already, but am I the only one that noticed the groping of all the female patients' chests, regardless of the ailment they said they had?

well, you can't blame a guy who has been dead a couple of hundred years for wanting to get a cheap feel.

 

[supercorgi]

Re: McFeeley

Sorry if this has been said in one of the other threads already, but am I the only one that noticed the groping of all the female patients' chests, regardless of the ailment they said they had?

No you're not alone. I noticed that as well. He was copping quite a few feels as he was doing his holy work.