15 Responses to La Blog

1. Emily, on March 6th, 2008 at 9:08 am Said:

   YAH! Good for you! I am always frustrated by people who don’t understand/refuse to participate in discussion and/or debate. I was the president of my debate club and in my house growing up my father stresed the idea of listening to the other party and backing up your own side. I am looking forward to checking out La Wade’s blog and getting the other perspective. WOO!
2. Rachel, on March 6th, 2008 at 9:50 am Said:

   I certainly admire her no-advertising stance. I don’t know if I have ever disagreed with her personally, but I think we need more non-biased discussion out there on weight to spark real debate.
3. Meghan1, on March 6th, 2008 at 9:52 am Said:

   (I have changed my name since another Meghan is posting at the same time as I am.)

   I have known of La Wade and her pedigree from way back, and it is amazing to me how many people have a knee-jerk, negative reaction to her posts. Her knowledge is first-hand from the trenches, and she always challenges what I think I know in a fair, non-judgmental way. Thanks for the link, I will be reading!
4. lisa-marie, on March 6th, 2008 at 11:01 am Said:

   Awesome! Thanks for the link, Mo!
5. BigLiberty, on March 6th, 2008 at 1:02 pm Said:

   I suppose I should qualify here, since I’m one of these knee-jerk “reactors” to what La Wade has said in the past:

   What bothers me about La Wade’s posts is that she’s not an objective researcher. Her obesity research is funded by Eli Lilly, a Big Pharma company.

   Therefore, I take her comments in stride because she has an interest in showing that obesity is a “disease” that can be “cured” with some kind of drug/treatment/so forth (since that is the interest of those who fund her research).

   That makes me skeptical and uncomfortable and, frankly, angry in the name of objective science.
6. Cassy, on March 6th, 2008 at 1:25 pm Said:

   I’m one of those in between people. Some things La Wade says I agree with and some things no. The important thing, though, is I always stop to think about the comments she leaves. Maybe something that is said won’t make sense to me in the context it’s in, but sometimes I think outside of the topic and can use the information to jump start another thought process. Anyway that’s just my overly worded way of saying I’m definitely happy to hear about this new blog. Good luck La Wade!
7. Cindy, on March 6th, 2008 at 1:32 pm Said:

   Well, I guess I always keep in mind that science seeks better explanations rather than to PROVE things, and I have always respected her POV.

   I don’t think I’ve been knee-jerk. I have thought it odd when La Wade has been critical of a few of my posts for being tangential, but that’s because I thought tangents were “legal” here.
8. Cindy, on March 6th, 2008 at 1:32 pm Said:

   Shoot. I meant to say “yay!” about her blog and “congratulations!”
9. ginger, on March 6th, 2008 at 2:28 pm Said:

   YAY! Bookmark time.
10. E. Black, on March 6th, 2008 at 2:53 pm Said:

    From seeing her comments on here La Wade is definitely a smart cookie. I may not always agree with what she says but she always says something that makes me think.
11. La Wade, on March 6th, 2008 at 3:34 pm Said:

    Thanks, everyone, for all the positive feedback and the great comments over at the blog, too!

    Big Liberty, I’m not sure where you get the idea that I’m funded by Lilly, because I’m not, nor have I ever been. Right now, my research funding comes from an internal grant at the university where I work. I’ve also applied for several other grants that I’m waiting to hear back on, but none of those involve funding from drug companies either. And of course, the blog itself has no funding.
12. BigLiberty, on March 6th, 2008 at 4:26 pm Said:

    I’m sorry, you’re not this Jennifer Wade?

    http://www.jbc.org/cgi/content/abstract/275/21/16258

    http://www.jbc.org/cgi/content/abstract/275/44/34797
13. La Wade, on March 6th, 2008 at 4:34 pm Said:

    Indeed, that is me, and that was a lab I worked in from 1996-1998, but I was not paid off the Lilly grant. I suppose that some of the equipment that I used in the lab might have been paid for by Lilly, though.
14. La Wade, on March 6th, 2008 at 4:43 pm Said:

    If you’re still questioning my objectivity vis-a-vis Lilly, though, you should check out my thesis work, which established a possible mechanism by which atypical antipsychotic drugs can cause type II diabetes…since Lilly makes Zyprexa, the most diabetogenic of all atypical antipsychotics, they can’t have been too happy about those findings.
15. BigLiberty, on March 6th, 2008 at 4:50 pm Said:

    I see. Well, I know the murkiness of scientific grants first hand.

    Looking forward to seeing some of your papers!

Subscribe to the comments for this post (RSS)