health

Google bans ads for 'unproven' therapies, including stem cells

7 Comments
By Alastair Pike

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2019 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

7 Comments
Login to comment

And who is going to do the censorship? The people that are profiting from other methods?

How is google profiting? how is the International Society for Stem Cell Research profiting? I can imagine you have proof of it right? i mean, google is not replacing the ads for the scams with real therapies, because they do not exist yet, so there is nothing to make profit. That is just nonsense, the only people profiting right now from this are the fake doctors that pretend to have a effective therapy when at much is an unethical trial and most of the time just a simple scam for vulnerable people. That is why they don't want google to ruin their unethical business because scientifically they will never get recognition (since they don't have the necessary results) so they need desperate people to fall into their scams directly by using google.

Like uh...I cannot believe I have to even say this...but...uh....I meant something like a regulatory panel....I mean obviously not an in-house investigation where the companies check themselves out and find their product not only cures cancer but makes julienne fries.

So you want people to put a label saying "this is worthless trash made to get your money without giving anything useful back" but leave the ads so people can fell on it when they are desperate enough to stop thinking clearly? That is unethical, a private company have the freedom not to be an accomplice of the scams, the rights of the patients and their families not to be targeted by scammers is more important than the right of the scammers to target desperate people.  A regulatory panel would accomplish its role as easily as simply banning the ads, they bring nothing positive to anybody but the scammers so why keep them? People can still choose, just not by using google and other services from companies that are at least this bit ethical.

And four thumbs down. Hard to believe how much internet people hate freedom.

It can also be simply that people don't like users defending the right of scammers to easily prey on desperate victims, there is no such right.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Just slap a label on it. Let the people choose.

And who is going to put the label? the people that are trying to fool people in need? It would be naive to think that unscrupulous "doctors" promoting useless and unproven therapies costing fortunes will ever do that, much less the antivaxxers that don't even have the moral values to stop using a lie when anybody proves to them they are wrong. Your suggestion is like letting anybody call pretending to be a family member in danger, after all old people should know better right?

If something is obviously a fraud and its trying to make money from desperate people, there is no obligation to support it. Google has all the right to refuse helping fakes put in danger the health of vulnerable patients, the more the people lying have to work to reach their victims the better the world is.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Don't be ridiculous. Why get so upset and start harping on about 'freedom' just because it's the Internet?

We have had rules and regulations to protect against false advertising for generations in newspapers, radio and television.

If there was a television or magazine advert claiming a cure for cancer, and desperate people spent money on it there would be arrests and fines and all sorts.

This is no different and long overdue

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Google bans ads for anyone who thinks google sucks.

LOL

Talk about building your own demise.

Invalid CSRF

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I am not in favour of unproven therapies, but I am even less in favour of Google deciding what I am allowed to see and what not. Sheesh!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

And who is going to put the label? the people that are trying to fool people in need?

And who is going to do the censorship? The people that are profiting from other methods?

Like uh...I cannot believe I have to even say this...but...uh....I meant something like a regulatory panel....I mean obviously not an in-house investigation where the companies check themselves out and find their product not only cures cancer but makes julienne fries.

And four thumbs down. Hard to believe how much internet people hate freedom.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Ban. Ban. Ban. Do children rule the world? Has anyone ever heard of a disclaimer? Just slap a label on it. Let the people choose.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites