[Note that this creed is specifically for Personal Bloggers. If you’re a Corporate Blogger you might find this Draft Code of Conduct, Corporate Blogger’s Creed, somewhat tongue-in-cheek but excellent Business Blogger’s Creed and these Legal Guidelines useful.]

What is a Creed?

‘Creed’ comes from the Latin word “credere” — to believe — and is a statement of principles or beliefs. It is different to a Code of Conduct, which is normally enforced or controlled by an industry body. A creed is a totally voluntary adoption of a framework, and often refers to a religious belief system. A belief system cannot be imposed. In this sense, a creed is simply a statement of an individual’s philosophy.

Personal bloggers, by definition, are answerable to no-one, and this invariably leads to widely differing standards of personal blogs. After a considerable and fruitless search for a simple creed I could subscribe to, I thought I’d table what is important to me. Your comments, suggestions and criticisms are welcomed. And if it makes sense to you, why not voice your support by leaving a comment. Who knows, there might even be a need to create a site listing all blogs who voluntarily subscribe to the Personal Blogger’s Creed.

The Personal Blogger’s Creed

I believe in the right to Freedom of Expression, which permits a blogger to write about anything on their mind.

I believe in personal accountability for the outcome of anything blogged.

I believe that a blogger should write only what they hold in their heart to be true; that writing purely for the sake of SEO results or advertising revenue, whether on their own blog or commenting on another’s, is indefensible.

I believe that blogging which succeeds best — and best deserves success — is considerate of the reader, and thus provides meaningful content which educates, inspires, assists and guides; that the supreme test of good blogging is the measure of usefulness to the reader.

I believe that creation is infinitely more valuable than duplication; that where duplication is necessary it should be accompanied by a new thought, an expanded idea, or a valuable discussion.

Your thoughts?

‘Twas October 18 and Congress was a twitter. Senators and Representatives fought and they flittered. Some thought society must provide for the children. Others maintained only parents need be responsible for their wards. Congressional Democrats discussed and debated. For them Health Care for the little ones, that was the issue. When suddenly they realized this pursuit was not viable. A few thought if they built a coalition, designed a compromise all would be well. Thus, a proposal was submitted. Funds for the children in the form of Abstinence Education, surely, that would fly; health insurance went bye-bye.

As Congress deliberated and did few deeds, parents congregated and presumed a great need. In the corners of Portland, Maine parents chattered and prattled. Could we, should we, would we give our Middle School students a prescription. Might contraceptives and condoms cure societal ills? For these fine citizens sex was the subject. Who might the teacher be?
These anecdotes are as one. Elders inquire; who or how might we care for the little ones. What is right and what is wrong; what is neither, just misunderstood. In the House chambers, on the Senate floor, in living rooms near and far anxious adults ponder the possibilities their parents did not. Is sex a subject to be taught by the states, or once the babies arrive at school, is it too late. Continue reading

A forum member recently shared the Carl Sagan quote, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”

This quote assumes an objective universe, which is a rather biased way of looking at reality — and not particularly accurate either. In my opinion Carl Sagan’s quote is misleading at best.

What is proof anyway?

Proof is an artifact of viewing reality through an objective lens. However, proof is not a facet of actual reality. Reality just is. It does not need to be proven. Reality is secure enough in its own existence that it doesn’t care whether some being proves or disproves what it is. If you think reality cares about proof, you could also say it derives a sick satisfaction from all the false proofs that have been tendered in its name over the last few millennia.

Instead of proof what we really want is truth. And a good first truth to accept is that it’s only the squishy, lens-peering beings that require proof, which is actually a subjective experience. Continue reading

http://medicalveritas.com/manGirard.pdf

Link goes to external url .pdf

Marc Girard, MSc, MD
Abstract
Background: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) may be used to discard valuable data under the pretext that it does not correspond to the “best” criteria of proof, even when no results complying with these “best” criteria are available. Since their infrequent occurrences make it impossible to assess most adverse effects using randomised clinical trials (RCTs), drug safety offers frequent examples of selective assessment of data based upon this poor understanding of the fundamental tenets of EBM. While the gold standard of pharmaco-epidemiology (case/control studies) is usually ranked amongst the lower levels of evidence and is unattainable in many instances, the majority of safety problems are simply assessed using subjec-tive specifications (“acceptable”, “hard to interpret”, “not enough evidence”, “not causally demonstrated”). This vaccine-safety example illustrates that such specifications are almost always biased by prejudices and application inconsistencies. Continue reading