Not sure if the mods could address this. It's something that kind of bothers me on acne.org, a forum that supposedly supports various approaches to acne. I know the main point for some (Dan) is to make money off of the regimen products (let's be real, $$$ is part of the reason why this site exists, even though it's helping a lot of people). But I still think that in the list of possible acne treatments here http://www.acne.org/treatments.html , natural remedies shouldn't be labeled as largely ineffective. What's the point of having a Diet & Holistic forum on acne.org if the hosting site doesn't even support diet and holistic approaches to acne?
Sorry for being nit picky, media analysis is my job and I inevitably analyze these things. I just think it's ironic and biased to dismiss natural treatments while pushing accutane and dan's products as the most effective treatments. I thought Dan was all about alternative research and finding new things that work, not pushing something that has so many potential side effects while also discounting the experiences of so many people who fight acne the natural way.
Can someone give me an answer or correct the label on that page? It bothers smart people like me to see such narrow mindedness on that page. And if there is scientific evidence to back up that list, fine, then there are so many other scientific papers that list all the detrimental side effects of accutane and bp. Therefore, these treatments are not 100% successful and they are controversial. I just think other approaches should be given some merit, otherwise what is the point of having separate sub forums if you're only going to push 2 mainstream treatments? At least give it a "Somewhat Effective" rating...it's offensive to the hundreds of people (thousands over the years) who are posting on the holistic forum.
Anyway, my rant is over.
Edited by WishClean, 20 April 2014 - 09:10 PM.