Wonderful overlooked fact about Obamacare--it will curtail mandatory alternative medicine coverage!

[Moonwalk]

163. Name Calling and and Either/Or Fallacies means you've lost the argument....

Name calling means you call the person a bad name, and, as they don't want to be called that, they presumably will shut up. Like when Republicans call those arguing for Obama "communists." Those who don't want to be viewed as communists shut up. It's a form of intimidation and it's done because you know you've no good argument, so shutting up the other side--and/or intimidating people into not wanting to be identified with that other side--is the best you can manage. You said, "Big pharma are out in force" meaning that those in favor of this measure are pro-big-Pharma. That's name calling, as you don't know they are any such thing. Name-calling makes it look like you haven't any good counter argument. No evidence, proof or adequate response. You've been reduced to trying to shut up the opposition.

Second is the either/or. You make the assumption that if they're not in favor of these alternative meds, they must be in favor of big-pharma. This presumes one can't be in favor or both or neither. And that, again, is not true. These people are saying that alternative medicines have to pass scientific, double-blind studies before they're viewed as true medicine and subsidized by tax payers--AND it seems they want the same for all drugs, no matter where they come from. Be it the medical marijuana farmer, the lady with the crystals, or the big company trying to sell it's newest drug for constipation.

Putting it another way, the evil that drug companies do doesn't absolve the evil that quack medicine does. If the medicine is quack, then it shouldn't be financed, no matter who is putting it out. But you ignore this and, instead, argue that this discussion is either/or--that if a person doesn't favor alternative they must be on the side of big pharma. Which, again, makes you appear desperate, like the only way to win this argument is to scare people into agreeing with you. If you have a legitimate argument for why these alternative medicines are valid and should be financed, then present the evidence. Slipping into such fallacies only makes you look like you can't win the argument legitimately.