CAVEAT EMPTOR 6. ( OSTOMY CURES?)
Caveat emptor means ‘beware’,
so in this rhyme I’d like to share
some thoughts about a product where
there might be dangers hiding there.
Some might call me paranoid
when I begin to get annoyed
at some deceitful sales techniques
that lack some balancing critiques.
The label of a ‘stoma-cure’
seems, in itself, to be a lure
to catch those who are vulnerable
and maybe even gullible.
I logged onto an online site
whose title implied that it might
have found a ‘cure’ for ostomy
which raised my curiosity.
It turned out that their implication
of a ‘cure’ was fabrication
included in their publication
to help sales communication.
Their product that was on offer
could not ‘cure’, but I would proffer
was a different type of stoma
thus, their title’s a misnomer.
When once deceit enters the frame,
I start to think they play a game
where profit is the guiding aim,
so, I suspect the things they claim.
As I don’t wish to come amiss
I then dig deeper into this
to find that they boast research cash
will give their sales-pitch more panache.
This raises my suspicions high
that their main aims will be to try
to ‘sell’ this product for profit
to see how much they make off it.
On their website they display
certificates, that seem to say
that this product is ‘certified’
and safety is therefore implied.
But looking closer, it’s not so,
for these documents just show
that the firm is certified,
not the product, as implied.
When once suspicion is set in
then there’s no doubt that I begin
to scrutinise things they portray
and view them in a sceptic’s way.
To find out what they are about
I look for things that they leave out,
because omissions often show
those hidden things we ought to know.
I’d question how the money’s spent
and more precisely where it went,
for that might indicate a lot
and inform us who got what.
I’d ask about the whole affair
to try to find out if they care
about those patients where they failed
and had their fragile lives derailed.
I’d want to know all they’ve not said
or written, so it can’t be read
I’d like peer-group reviews so we
can have a balanced view to see.
When publications are not dated,
then, I for one, become frustrated,
because I cannot then decide
if certain things they’ve tried to hide.
I like the concept of reviews
where users can give their own views
of the products that they’ve had
no matter whether good or bad.
When users score from one to five
they help to keep my trust alive,
for as I read scores one and two
it helps me keep a balanced view.
When users views cannot be found
then, I’m afraid that I am bound
to have some feelings come on strong
that something might be badly wrong.
What happened to those guinea-pigs
who first tried out these thingamajigs?
would they still say they’re satisfied
with this gadget that they tried?
Or would they tell a different side,
perhaps of things folk wish to hide
as it might shine a light upon
a cynical, devious, selling con?
I’d like to know when these things fail,
I’d like to hear the victim’s rail
about their own experience
and any inconvenience.
But most of all I think I might
like to join a stoma site,
where ostomates speak openly
about the problems they foresee.
B. Withers 2022
