• Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 29 subscribers
  • Views 1435 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Interesting article?

I Sperg

Although many of you will find the source (particularly the comment section) not acceptable fayre, occasionally they produce an interesting article. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/new-research-validates-autisms-link-gut

I am trialling a more carnivore diet right now, as it seems to help reverse or prevent my "low moods".

I like my carbs, but they may not be as helpful as the cereal box told me as a youth. 

I've also learned about that heathy food pyramid thing was created by commerce, and not science...

Parents

  • I will admit that I'm not super likely to respect information coming from a website where the author is using the name of a Fight Club character and the readers also believe autism is caused by vaccines and 5G... yeah. 

  • in reply to T

    So you believe data is tainted by the associations of who reads it? 

    And you ascribe a narrow set of beliefs to the whole readership?

    That's a diverse way of thinking!

    Vive la difference!

  • in reply to I Sperg

    I know that personally I'm not knowledgeable enough to read two scientific papers and tell you which one is a genuine breakthrough and which one is dubious. So things such as who is reporting it and who is the intended audience are a useful barometer. 

    It seems unlikely in the extreme that anti-vax/5G conspiracists would all congregate to read legitimate scientific research, whereas the chances of them going to a website that's happy to report pseudoscience dressed up presentably seems much more probable. And yes, if someone is calling themselves Tyler Durden, I will probably wait for another source. 

  • in reply to T

    Anti-vaxer Andrew Wakefield got his paper printed in the Lancet, which later issued a retraction. However, it was his interview on the BBC that triggered public fear of MMR vaccination. At first sight, he was a consultant at a premier teaching hospital being interviewed by a tv channel that prides itself on its impartiality - hence he was believed. It was only later that problems of methodology and conflicts of interest (identified by the GMC) disproved his hypothesis. The trouble is that once a false story is in the public domain, some people will believe it even after it is disproven. Particularly parents trying to find someone to sue for "causing" their child's autism, and seeing drug companies as a target because they have big pockets.

Reply Children
No Data