rcj (12/13/82)
Well, I have decided to go ahead and comment on the proposed newsgroup net.med (vastly preferred over net.medicine, also allows subgroups) because the replies have slowed a bit. The final tally was 31 for creation of net.med and 3 against. And several of the yes votes were from people representing a group, such as this one: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% There is some local interest here at BTL Indian Hill in a medical newsgroup. The source of that interest is actually in what could become a subgroup of such a newsgroup, the concerns of diabetics. Thus, - yes, we're interested - please consider 'net.med' instead of the longer name, to leave good room for future subgroups - we would like to see the charter of the newsgroup be broader than that indicated in your news article; that is, not just medical news, but any medicine/health related discussion (it would probably end being this anyway, given the way the net operates). Paul Lustgarten ixn5c!pcl Netnews Administrator for ... Bell Labs - Indian Hill %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% I was just capering with joy, until I read this one and it really got me thinking: ********************************************************************* I vote no for forming a net.medicine group. It might be wise to think about some ramifications of the group before forming it. If someone posts medical advice to the newsgroup does that mean that they are practicing medicine? What if the advice given is wrong? I agree that there would be a benefit to having the newsgroup. I would be in favor of a moderated newsgroup in which all articles would be sent to a "competent" (read MD) person for screening. r.gur lime!orion!reha ************************************************************************ Any legal buffs out there? (Of course, if the guy above is right then any legal advice on the net is risky as well!!) I really think that, even though the response to the proposed newsgroup net.med was very much in favor, we need to have some more discussion on the ramifications mentioned above. Please post all discussion to net.misc or mail to me and I will be happy to summarize. I am one who would still like to see this group fly, but not directly into a hailstorm. (They don't sue the National Enquirer for its phony cancer cures, do they?) Curtis Jackson (...!floyd!burl!rcj)
skip (12/17/82)
I think that anyone giving medical advice over the network would be personally liable and therefore should consider the reprecussions of their advice before posting an article. As part of a medical research group, I would be dismayed if net.med were terminated/inhibited because of possible network responsibilty for somebody's poor judgement. On hearing of net.med, I had presumed it to be a group for discussion of medicine/health, not for the posting of anyone's symtoms. The only really appropriate responce to anyone putting their problems on the net is: "Go see a doctor". Skip Seelaus seismo!presby!skip