Can you show examples of her work which have been scientifically validated through peer reviews?
I deeply want to comprehend what drives people to endorse information from unqualified or non-peer-reviewed sources. The foundation of professionalism in all research disciplines depends on peer review for establishing credibility until official validation
takes place. Please explain the factors behind your faith in the statements they provide.
Why is yet another thread created for this? Donāt you have like four others?
A controversy exists regarding my thread because of unqualified dissectionist Becks Nairn who has no credible peer-reviewed findings. My question investigates how this lack of formal qualifications matches with the authority that accepts her findings. Does she match the professional standards of veterinary pathologist or osteopath veterinarian but without any degree credentials? The current situation might either represent the spread of false information or it might represent something different.
This investigation has drawn criticism from some individuals and I suggest they should express their concerns to the House of Lords. lol You should avoid participating in conversations that benefit from your absence when your presence isnāt welcome.
Is this the poster that was outed on Horse and Hound as a bot/bot user?
Your Text is Human written
0%
AI GPT*
Your claim about my use of AI requires evidence verification thus establishing its truth. No evidence supports this statement in discussions based on facts. Is this post AI-generated? Yes or no? There needs to be equal standards for making such statements about the work of all interested parties. The provision of equine community courses and services depends on professionals not claiming veterinarian status without a licence or breaking regulatory framework rules. The practise of training paying clients with no qualifications in anatomy and osteopathy remains totally unacceptable to me. The effective management of these subjects requires sufficient accredited learning combined with proper training so professionals can protect the welfare of their horse patients. When educational services are carried out without holding the required qualifications it leads to potential factual errors and may result in adverse effects for the learning process. The evaluation of my communication approach remains valuable to me although I assert that both conceptual precision and messaging clarity should exist in harmony with one another. For professional discussions accurate information transmission requires detailed terminology choices that match the subject matter area. The use of accessible language functions as an enlightenment method which creates understanding but never should create impediments to comprehension. I plan to use this information in my future business interactions. I extend an open invitation to participate in evidence-based discussions about these matters while accepting all productive dialogues.
Highlighted text is suspected to be most likely generated by AI*
1,627 Characters
232 Words
Export to PDF Oh, absolutely, Iād be delighted to run yet another test on yet another site. After all, having strong evidence is just so incredibly difficult to come by these days
We have arrived at the speculative fiction field according to your assessment. The evidence needs to be provided to validate the claim that someone has exposed me as both a bot and a bot user on the Horse and Hound platform. You are aware that baseless accusations hold almost no value similar to how a horseless saddle becomes useless.
If I were a bot then I would pursue becoming an advanced artificial system that could participate in substantial conversations and support expert standards throughout the equine industry. I have human qualities that include an appreciation for precision together with some sense of humor.
This thread is weird AF. Iām going to back slowly out. Hey OP. Maybe take your grievances up with your target. Contact proper authorities. Making weird posts online do absolutely nothing.
???
Okie dokie. You type a lot of words but you donāt say much.
Iād say come back when you figure out how to make a point and not preach nonsense to the choir, but Iām not holding my breath.
Maybe take your grievances up with the target of your complaints. Or make a report to relevant authorities. But this aināt it.
Your comments matter while your description of this topic as āweird AFā lacks clarity since you have steered clear of the main theme at hand. The main problem requests readers to evaluate whether an unlicensed practitioner holding dissection courses possesses genuine credentials when they lack scientific research and approved certifications to teach anatomy and osteopathy. This issue infringes upon professional ethics as well as public faith while posing threats to equine well-being making the dismissal of āstrangenessā inadequate.
Professional and welfare-related documentation relating to these concerns follows official protocol when sent to relevant authorised bodies. The equine community requires participation in public discussions to enhance decision-making performance while maintaining professional accountability.
Ignoring discussions on serious concerns presented through social media amounts to an unfair dismissal of genuine problems. Social media posts which address valid issues should be taken seriously because they promote important discussions and need proper recognition instead of being ignored. Thoughtfully involvement alongside intelligent input about this subject carries more worth than attempts to disrupt or undermine its progress.
Your refusal to address the situation makes you appear supportive of untrained individuals who perform paid dissections which raises serious ethical and professional questions. Do not worry because these actions to disrupt your facts will not succeed in making them disappear.
You relate the development of a significant argument to writing many words without meaningful impact. The teaching of dissection and osteopathy without proper qualification stands as the main problem because both methods impose serious ethical and professional standards. Such discussions work to defend horse welfare while guaranteeing professional standards which contradicts your assertion that they are nonsense.
The established grievance procedures get used for legitimate cases of harm or medical misconduct according to my assurance. The equine community needs public discourse to both maintain accountability standards and obtain complete information about their horses. Removing all examination of these issues demonstrates an inability to conduct sincere discourse about important matters rather than establishing their actual validity.
Your evasive behaviour indicates you avoid engaging properly with credibility and accountability issues. You should present your viewpoint with precise factual information rather than casting off important matters with superficial statements.
Beep bop boop
Yep, sure is.
If youāre that opposed to Becks Nairn, why donāt you file a complaint?
Bringing this issue into public view stems from a desire to educate public audiences about unqualified dissectionists who deliver dissection courses but lack the peer-reviewed validation of their competence. The problem exceeds private complaints to include both professional integrity and protection of public trust and equine well-being.
The filing of formal complaints remains a valid option for documented malpractice cases but public discussion plays an equal role in addressing this issue. This process creates opportunities for knowledgeable dialogue between stakeholders who can exercise their charge to maintain individual responsibility alongside their ability to select what they believe to be the best options.
Trust and payment of services prove questionable for professionals whose lack genuine qualifications along with scientific credibility. The conversation focuses on revealing these worries while establishing wider responsibilities.
Our discussion had a legal expert within it without my knowledge. During this conversation, did you receive your law degree before it began or after?
Cocktail recipes anyone? Or really nice small plates to snack on?
Me Iād just do Prosecco and lime with popcorn. Tonight I made homemade pizza. Naan crust. Fontina cheese. Diced tomato with turkey pepperoni and chipotle honey drizzled. Yum yum. So good to be a human.
Um, odd attempt at humor. No, I have absolutely no legal education beyond what any ordinary person would pick up. I really just wondered if it would be more productive for you to file a legal complaint against Becks Nairn in the appropriate jurisdiction, rather than coming onto horse forums and spewing about how horrible she is. I am in no way a supporter of hers; I did follow her on Facebook for a while, just because it was interesting, but got tired of having pictures of parts of dead horses on my FB feed and a bit of holier-than-thou language in her posts.
I am a biostatistician and programmer/analyst in SAS and R. Or was, anyway, as I am 90% sure I am retiring, after a year of looking in a very weird job market, now made absolutely horrible by the NIH cuts. This is not a bad thing at all but I will miss it.
Thank you for your candid commentary, though I must admit, your attempt to juxtapose my actions with your professional rĆ©sumĆ© feels somewhat misplaced. While I appreciate your suggestion to pursue legal recourse, I must remind you that public forums exist precisely for the exchange of opinions and experiences, even those you may find unpalatable. My intent was not to āspew,ā as you so eloquently put it, but to foster a broader discussion on accountability and professional standards.
As for your critique of Becks Nairnās content, it seems we share a distaste for certain aspects of her approach. However, I find it curious that you followed her work long enough to form such detailed impressions, only to dismiss my efforts to address similar concerns in a public space. Perhaps your expertise in biostatistics could be applied to analysing the patterns of discourse here, rather than undermining the validity of my contributions. After all, intellectual diligence is best demonstrated through constructive dialogue, not dismissive remark
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
