To help further understand the use of the wiki page wiki talk page we will look at another example. When talking about HGH the wiki page seems to stray from the fact that the drug is dangerous, and highlight only the positive attributes. When you look at any site, you must look for unbalanced information. In the case of the wiki page, the section called side effects portrays the drug as a safe drug when “used properly”,

“Use of GH as a drug has been approved by the FDA for several indications. This means that the drug has acceptable safety in light of its benefits when used in the approved way. Like every drug, there are several side effects caused by GH, some common, some rare.One survey of adults that had been treated with replacement cadaver GH (which has not been used anywhere in the world since 1985) during childhood showed a mildly increased incidence of colon cancer and prostate cancer, but linkage with the GH treatment was not established”

This section of the wiki page down plays the serious health issues concerning HGH. It also leaves a very vague understanding of what a responsible way of taking the drug is. The way that wiki talks about the drug seems one sided in that they don’t offer a balanced opposing side. After reading this section one is left with an idea that the drug is not really as bad as people say. The fact that this section compares the side effects to any other drugs side effects lessens the potential danger that people might see in the drug. According to Drugs for Life, by Joseph Dumit, he supports this idea when he states, “medical sociologists have recognized how the neutrality of health information can be manipulated through selection and amplification, privileging one form of explanation over others” (Dumit 42). By supplying one-sided information you can alter the action that a person might take. If one was to hear a balanced description on the drug, one that stated the good and the bad effects equally, one could make a better decision on whether or not to take the drug. Dumit talks about how hearing information from certain sources or amplifying a certain part, as we see here, can alter the actions of an individual.

When it comes to the wiki talks page, many have argued the fact that the main wiki page seems to be one sided by supplying the reader with a one sided argument on the side effects page. In addition, some have given personal testimonies,

“Several friends of mine injected real, synthetic growth hormone in California around 1990. All of them achieved outstanding levels of muscle, lowered body fat, and strength far beyond anything they had gained taking steroids. HOWEVER... a few of them developed severe problems due to bone growth. The eyes of one person actually spread apart at least 1 INCH. He became so ugly it was difficult to look at him. Another person began having painful problems with his elbows and knees due to excessive bone growth. And another person came down with a terrible case of diabetes. Growth hormone is no joke and I urge athletes to avoid it at all costs. Even under a doctor's supervision you can run into problems that will last you a lifetime. It's just not worth it.”

This is a very destructive drug, one should not have to search in the talk pages to see information like this. Though this individual did not support his claims with any form of evidence, other than his own word, one cannot help but feel the sympathy he has for his friends. Here we see the subtle side effects that were described in the beginning of this paper take a different turn. These seem real, no longer typical side effects that one would obtain using any other drug. Though this person may not be suffering from the drug directly, he is affected by the cause. Dumit describes the idea of a more powerful method of delivery than straight facts, “Although a physician’s recommendation may be highly credible, it doesn’t carry the power of empathy and understanding that a fellow sufferer typically conveys” (Dumit 83) Here we see that a sufferer understand first had what the effect of a drug can really do. By simply reading the main wiki page we don’t get that feeling of danger from the drug. But once we enter the talk page, the dangers become real. Dumit emphasizes the idea that a user can describe a drug better than a physician can. We can get all the facts from the wiki main page but when it comes to actual personal testimonials and a deeper understanding of what the drug might do, one must venture into the wiki talk pages.