WeAreTheKey

...For pharmaceutical companies everywhere!

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31190909

Yeah, that is an extremely "loaded" article. I find it very interesting that the 1st part of the article does not match up with the rest of it. The title and opening paragraphs lead off by simply making the ridiculous statement that federal studies show almost no positive effects of "alternative" medicine. But the rest of the article actually goes into the legitimate concerns of how to go about researching these methods as well as the difficulty discerning which are worthy of research and which are clearly "snake oil". It quotes people on both sides of the argument, makes some good points, and in the end is not a bad article.

It's almost as if someone made the editor go back in and "add" the first couple paragraphs, knowing that many people don't read past that point and will come away with the simplistic idea that alt. medicine is a quack.

And as a side note, did anyone notice the strange way the article uses quotation marks? I've seen MSN articles do that more often lately. The quotation marks end seemingly halfway through the quote. Is the article actually "paraphrasing" part of the quote? and not being clear about it. It's quite suspicious, and draws into question whether they are intentionally using partial quotes for misleading purposes.