Just in case you happen across a website called “The Doctor Blog“, disregard it. We’ve been unable to validate that Dr. Paul Newton (the alleged blogger) exists. But here’s what we have verified:
- His claim to have received the most innovative doctor of the decade by The New England Journal of Medicine in 2015 is unsubstantiated. There is no such award and he is not listed at that reputable website as an author of any papers.
- His credentials are very sketchy and he fails to disclose where his practice is located or any of his medical affiliations.
- His website is less about analysis and more about selling questionable products. We stumbled across his site when investigating a dubious weight-loss and erectile dysfunction products. He was touting their effectiveness despite the fact that the products are scams.
- His writing style is remarkably similar to the scammers who write about a number of dubious medical products.
In short, this website should be thoroughly disregarded. It appears to be an affiliate marketing website written by infoscammers . They mostly follow the same template: Product Description, Examination Record, Review or Analysis, Site Preview, Download button, Pros and Disadvantages and Conclusion. Many of them also have a Leave Page Pop-Up that makes it difficult to return to your Google search. They are hawked by affiliate websites that come by a whole array of names, such as “Daily Scam Reviews“, “Review Tools” “Scam Review Today“, “ScamX”, “Queen’s Reviews” and other such sounding websites. The vast majority of them are little more than automated shills for these scam sites, designed to conceal real scam reports. They are authored by professional fake review writing services or “reputation management” companies. While they are all hawking different “products”, the share many common sales tactics:
- They have a link or embedded video of the product/service offer. If the outgoing link on the review product includes an affiliate tracking code, then you can be sure they are being compensated by the link.
- They don’t have a link describing the qualifications of the “reviewer”.
- Many of them don’t have a “Contact Us” menu or reveal information about the reviewing organization itself.
- The quality of the writing is odd — either bad translations or boilerplate sounding sentences.
- The information at the web site is limited to reviews. If the entire site is nothing seemingly impartial reviews, then the author has no expectation of having visitors return, and consequently, no risk of losing regular visitors.