Self-policing opportunity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Open Forum



Message

JSPT -> Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 5:24:37 PM)

I just saw an ad on TV for this website:

Easy Curves

'Just five minutes a day of using this wonderful new gadget can increase the average bustline from 36.4" to 37.2" in 30 days.'

The product itself is its own issue.  The part of the commercial that set off the alarms for me is that a PT is the medical expert who endorses the product.  Has it really begun?  Is a faculty member of an accredited physical therapy school actually hawking a method originally developed decades ago with the mantra "we must, we must, we must increase our bust!"?

We better stop this malarkey in its tracks, or physical therapy will go the way of certain other professions whose members will endorse any piece of pseudoscience for which they receive a paycheck. 



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 7:04:31 PM)

How much does it cost?  ;)



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 7:20:42 PM)

Ummm, JSPT, remember, a bustline will increase with exercise.  I'm sure that is true because the pecs beef up.  A larger bustline does not mean that the cup size will actually change. 

Those of us females that did the chant weren't looking for a larger bustline but instead larger breasts.  LOL  And in case you are wondering - no, the "method" didn't work. 

I couldn't find Kodat's research on PubMed.  The only research listed for her via google had a topic on kids and obesity and body mass assessments.

I wonder why she got involved with "Easy Curves?"



JSPT -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 8:45:24 PM)

Yes, SJ, I understand how one could make that argument. 

In the same fashion, a man can make his penis appear larger by losing weight, decreasing adipose tissue around the pubic region. 

So, let's say I want to advertise a system with the claim "Increase the size of your ____ with my patented diet and exercise system".  I then use my PT credentials as an expert in weight-loss and fitness.  I don't mention that the system only causes the appearance of increased size, just that it does.  Is that a good way to promote our profession and help PTs be recognized as experts in the muscoloskeletal field?

I think that PTs like the one featured in that ad are starting us down a slippery slope.  Do we want the public to become wary of information offered by someone with PT after their name?

As you may have guessed, addressing pseudoscience is a pet hobby of mine, and this "system" reaks of it.  Here is the reference I was looking for:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Eden_bust_developer

SJ: you (as a top-notch critical thinker and educated professional) are able to see an ad similar to the commercial for Easy Curves, sort out the BS, and understand how the promoters of the product can technically make the claims they do.  I do not think the general public is able to do so. 

Shouldn't we make every attempt to prevent our colleagues from using misleading advertising to make a few bucks?

For the record: I really hope I didn't cross any decency-lines with this post.  I think the example is a fair comparison, but if it is felt to be in poor taste, it will be removed.



PTupdate.com -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 9:28:55 PM)

First, the ad brings up an issue I had posted here quite a few years back....asking "Should PT's call themselves "doctor"".  This ad is the perfect example......DPTSc....I don't have a frigging clue what that is...and neither will the public.  However, the "Dr" in the front will lead FAR too many to believe she is a "doctor" of medicine.  So, it should read DR POOR DYE JOB, PT and under her name "Doctor of Physical Therapy"

While the hair coloring is poor, her description of what the product does is honest, and exactly what SJ points out....firms and supports the underlying musculature.  Nothing misleading, and I've had numerous women (including the wifey) ask me how to firm up the chest, along with all the other body parts they'll never be satisfied with

So, considering physicians are hawking products all the time, and most of them are bogus products at that, perhaps this is another avenue where we will gain some credibility.  While not a valid method, but when the average clueless public sees PT's being used to endorse things, it may actually give us some respect.

And JSPT.....I've lost as much weight as I could possibly lose.....the Irish Curse is still the Irish Curse



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 3, 2008 10:32:24 PM)

JSPT, it's too bad a PT would sell out for $9.99!  I doubt anyone knows what the heck a DPTSc is.  (I don't.)  The fishy thing is that the "university" isn't identified nor are the researchers.  Who researched it?  Increasing the bustline is SOO functional, especially for... pole dancers, escorts and strippers!!

I'm sorry, I can't take this ad seriously... my favorite picks just didn't do very well today.  JSPT, I do agree... depending on who saw the website or the infomercial a really bad taste will be the final impression.

JSPT, you need to email the EIM team and have the first woman inducted into "Whore of the Month Club!"  So far, it's all been men... go stir the pot and rile up a few therapists over there!!!  ;)  Is Dr. Jan S. Kodat really acting like a true neuromusculoskeletal expert?

John, but the website ad does a weird thing when you look at it - it does make the chest "grow" and from my perspective some women could easily misconstrue the growing to be a breast enhancement.  I think it is okay to endorse products, but there should be some thought about the product.

Oh, my gosh... with just a bit of research... First of all... check out the video.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ur9piNe4fs  I froze the video enough to figure out the study.  What a horrible piece of crap!  Read this thing!!  This paper is all over the place!  http://jrnlappliedresearch.com/articles/Vol5Iss4/10Petrofsky.pdf  THIS is the kind of research coming out of Loma Linda University and Azusa Pacific University????????  Jan S. Kodat is not mentioned in the article and wasn't a researcher.  I couldn't see the year on the video, but the 2005 article looks like it is the same one.



JSPT -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 6:27:12 AM)

Ok, since I have a lot of respect for the two of you, I'll downgrade my outrage from "stroke-inducing" to "name-calling-for-no-reason".

I agree that getting us out there more could help the profession.  Its just too bad that it couldn't be for a more legitimate product. 

John, now that you mention it, using the doctor title is pretty shady.  I think what they meant was PT, DSc.  The DSc part, according to a past professor, is "the same as a PhD, but you don't have to be someone's b---- for 2-4 years".



TexasOrtho -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 11:56:26 AM)

There are several terminal doctorates that are similar to the Ph.D. but aren't exactly the same.  I'll probably get skewered for referencing Wiki on this forum by some folks but this is the only site I found that discusses the differences and similaries.  The program I just started is a doctorate program leading to an (Sc.D.) for example. 

It will be interesting to see how folks who've earned a doctorate throw the title around.  I think it speaks more to the individual vs. the title or profession.

Here's the Wiki reference.



PTupdate.com -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 12:15:14 PM)

JSPT....."outrage"   and "stroke-inducing" are pretty strong terms, hardly worth using with regards to my post!  I'd personally save those words when discussing a topic such as Darfur

I watched the YouTube video that SJ posted, and this PT does exactly what I knew would happen with some in our profession.  Bring up the video and ask your friends and patients what they think her credentials are, when they see "Dr" in front of her name, the xray light with films up in the background, the white lab coat, and of course that all important clipboard.  I'll bet most, if not all, think she's a physician.  So yes, throw this one up on EIM as well

I see where SJ notes they mislead people into thinking the boobs actually get larger, as the animation used pumps them up a good cup size.  But, I think the product will do a good job of strengthening the different portions of the pecs and help lift what sits on top.  Depending on the person, their ability to develop muscle mass, etc. one may see the appearance of bigger boobs.  My wife estimates my man-boobs are a small B (just had her check so I could be accurate here).  So, if I really had breast tissue over top, the weightlifting I do could possibly double what nature gave me.  If I stop lifting, I'll atrophy, and no longer have this small B.

While I hate to waste the 16 pages of paper of the research article, I plan on reading and perhaps using as my update tomorrow.  SJ.....any points in the article that you feel are invalid, let me know as well.



T_Thom -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 12:43:34 PM)

[&o] Embarrassed for Jan.
Nice thing she's looking out for her bank account, not the impact things like this have on the profession and doctoral title. I wonder what academic administrators have to say about this endorsement?
http://www.calbaptist.edu/studentlife/faculty/default2.aspx?id=3694

In the grand scheme of things, it's still not as negative as working for a RFP, IMO.





T_Thom -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 12:49:37 PM)

On second thought, maybe she's doing this to thumb her nose at the academic institution. Esp. given it has a religious affiliation. My in-laws are tenured professors, and the politics within some institutions can be amazingly ridiculous. Could Jan be a rebel?



Bournephysio -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 3:04:59 PM)

"the same as a PhD, but you don't have to be someone's b---- for 2-4 years" What did he/she mean buy that? You don't have to do as much work? PhDs and DScs are judged buy what you publish. If you can get away with less work, you won't be publishing as much and thus will have a harder time finding a job and getting grants.

While DSc and PhDs are relatively interchangeable in most of the academic world, in physio they are a little different. Most of the physio DSc programs that I have seen have been advanced clinical degrees with a small research component. As such they generally don't prepare you well for a typical academic faculty position.

If this Dr Kodat doesn't have any publications in a pubmed indexed journal, she's likely either published under another name (maiden name?), or is clinical faculty or is about to lose her job.



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 4, 2008 8:53:22 PM)

Duffy, Duffy, Duffy... where oh where do you want me to start???  That whole introduction is all over the place.  First of all, resistance exercise is discussed across a huge spectrum.  This little device isn't some magical device that is really going to give the full range of benefit of resistance exercise in the mere 5 minutes daily.  Come on... what a joke.  Then, there is a discussion of how resistance exercise assists with rotator cuff injury and pain... again, this would not be my first tool of choice to provide resistance exercise for a rotator cuff injury.  And then... proper resistance exercise to the back muscles can be an alternative for people instead of back surgery.  What??  Like this thing is going to be an alternative for back surgery??  Upper body exercise can reduce obesity?  Really... they cite some foreign journal - beats me what journal it is.  Then, they start yapping about weight bearing programs... ummm.. is this device a weight bearing device???  Upper body conditioning maintains shoulder mobility AND reduces upper body osteoporosis.  Huh?  The whole first part is horrible... horrible.  The final paragraph in the introduction is what the whole focus of the introduction SHOULD have been about..  Onto the "methods."  Well... isometric strength was measured but no mention of how accurate the device was at measuring strength.  And then, muscle thickness was measured - again, no mention of accuracy.  I'm a bit lost as to how firmness of muscle was determined - the squashability?  Hmmm... Girth... unknown how accurate.  No mention of interrater or intrarater reliability either.  So, in a nutshell - all those results that are mentioned - no standard measures of error mentioned... no reliability mentioned.  Then... when using the device... increasing the workload is vague - what was the workload initially and how much was it increase?  Is the measurement from acromion to nipple valid and reliable in determining whether the breast line raised?  The discussion is just as crappy as the introduction.  The discussion starts yapping about all sorts of crap unrelated to the current study.  What muscle layer is above the pectoralis major and rhomboid muscles???  What the heck?  Yep, exercise has been shown to reduce breast cancer... but the exercise is "moderate" exercise and not probably some 5 minute gizmo.  THEN they get into yapping about large, sagging breasts, oh, but their exercise program didn't get into strengthening muscles to assist with the weight of the sagging breasts.  How about this.. since exercise can be just as effective as surgery for back pain, then exercise intervention could prevent surgeries for saggy breasts... huh?  I hope they didn't mean 5 minutes of exercise per day!  What a piece of crap!!!!!  No, Duffy, don't go using this article for anything but the trash bin.  I can't believe anyone published it!  I haven't read anything as poorly written as this article in a long time... oh, wait... the final sentence of one abstract on how the CPR for spinal manipulative therapy fails was pretty bad too.  LOL




kamryn -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 5, 2008 9:05:27 PM)

Hi bournephysio - if someone is going to call for the good Dr Kodat's job for a lack of publication, then someone better be ready to fire about half of the PT faculty in the US - the link below suggests that the number of faculty publications in the majority of PT schools in the US is not all that impressive.....

http://www.ptjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/88/3/376



Bournephysio -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 6, 2008 6:03:51 PM)

I meant clinical/teaching faculty but those are atrocious stats in that paper.



Crevidence -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 13, 2008 8:46:05 PM)

Her personal quote is more worrisome to me than the endorsement.

"Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men,
Colossians 3:23, NASB"

This quote leads me to believe that potentially for that person, lord > professional ethics.  Depending on the word of the lord, she has a get out of jail free card if her morals/ethics don't jive with the sound, well thought out ethics (developed by men) of our profession.  This could potentially be bad for the profession.  It could be worse for the profession/society if many follow suite.

It is my understanding that many people who believe in the lord also believe in virgin births, resurrections etc..  This seems like a gateway to detecting acupuncture meridians and palpating FRS lumbar segments.

It is surprising in the 21st century an "academic" would have a quote like that.



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 13, 2008 9:43:15 PM)

Crevidence... you're crossing a line right now.  I don't believe going down a path slamming Christians is going to accomplish anything OR substantiate your perspective.  Your above comment has nothing to do with evidence based practice.  Jan's quote probably has more to do with her place of employment... a Baptist university, hence one reason for a Biblical quote.  The quote in simple terms is that Christians should lead their lives for God - He is first and foremost in the lives of Christians.  (Taking a look at the time period in which that part of the Bible was written would probably help you understand that the use of the word "men" had more to do with the structure of society at that time and not a men vs women type of reference.)   And to help you understand just a bit more fully, Christians only believe in one Virgin birth and only one Resurrection.  And honestly, whether one is a Christian or not a Christian is not THE determining factor as to whether acupuncture meridians can be detected or whether FRS lumbar segments can be palpated. 



Crevidence -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 13, 2008 10:05:37 PM)

No line was crossed and I slammed no one. I also never mentioned christians.



SJBird55 -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 13, 2008 10:14:21 PM)

Get out the gloves and take a corner.. don't go trying to tell me you didn't cross a line... I'm not stupid.

Reread your post again.  Here's a quote that might assist you.
quote:

It is my understanding that many people who believe in the lord also believe in virgin births, resurrections etc..  This seems like a gateway to detecting acupuncture meridians and palpating FRS lumbar segments. 


You're way off base with that post.



Crevidence -> RE: Self-policing opportunity (May 13, 2008 10:25:10 PM)

On my above quote.  Supernatural events are not based on evidence.  Virgin births and resurrections have no evidence.  Those who believe in things with no evidence may be likely to believe in other things without evidence.  An example of those things are acupuncture meridians and FRS lumbar segments.  This is not off base and conceivable.  Look at the wording in this post and the other.

I don't think you are stupid, but possibly emotional. 



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode

0.078