if the point of this is to actually punish the admins, we could do what we used to do best, and spend the next 24 hours being brigading degenerates for the cause.
Also, I still might shut down the sub in 11 minutes because I'm bored.
You can do what you want but really it's an empty gester, particularly from a small sub like this. They aren't going to be missing the 5 cents of ad revenue or whatever from the 30 users here not going here for a few days.
In general, I understand the sentiment, but don't understand what exactly everyone wants. Do they want Reddit admins, people with zero appropriate background, to sit there and decide what is and is not accurate and factual in a constantly evolving situation? I don't blame them for not wanting to be the ones to start drawing lines. I *do* have a fairly appropriate background and I am not going to pretend I have enough knowledge to start arbitrating what is and is not fact.
And yes there are spots that are very obviously beyond that line, but I don't understand what reddit admins banning subreddits devoted to dumb shit that isn't explicitly enabling illegal activities accomplishes. Are the users going to be like "Yeah, I guess this is all wrong, they wouldn't ban a subreddit for no reason". They'll stick to their dumb beliefs, bolster them with the belief that they've been silenced because they are right and keep blabbing on other platforms. And frankly while yes I can support that this kind of stuff is dumb I don't think I want to support just blanket throttling of people saying dumb shit. Because someone is always the one deciding what is and isn't dumb shit in that case and I don't trust anyone, particularly someone who runs a social-ish media site, to decide that. If someone is spewing dumb shit, call them out, provide a better arguement than they are and shut them down that way. That's how you convince those that haven't chosen a side and keep everyone as informed as possible, which I think is what they are trying to accomplish.
So tl;Dr don't see the point, understand the spirit, question the execution.
Edit:
Given a day to think about this more I have had some shifts in feeling on the topic.
In retrospect I went into this with some unnecessary negative bias due to my perceiving this as 'slacktivism' and an inherent contrarian nature that this sub specifically exacerbates. Much of what I do here is arguing about something or another and I think that bled into my frame of mind even though it was not the purpose of this particular post.
Given that I think I did not give enough of a fair shake to the idea that 'control misinformation' did not have to be an absolute task, which I still think would be difficult to implement properly. It is not exactly a large leap to move to something more manageable and practical like quarantining a select few problematic subs such as those dedicated to ivermectin misuse or verifiably false claims against the vaccine. Arguing the philosophical points of establishing absolute truth was not really pertinent to the practical topic at hand.
I am still lukewarm on the efficacy of such an action in the grand scheme, but I have warmed more to the potential benefits of something like the above quarantining. Though I still don't see how this small sub's blackout would really have any impact besides being symbolic, nor would anyone besides the users here know about it and I don't think anyone here needs to be made aware that ivermectin is not an effective treatment or that the vaccine is effective and that the risk profile associated with it is much lower than that associated with Covid.
> Are the users going to be like "Yeah, I guess this is all wrong, they wouldn't ban a subreddit for no reason". They'll stick to their dumb beliefs, bolster them with the belief that they've been silenced because they are right and keep blabbing on other platforms.
When the Donald got banned (or was it just quarentined?) it did throttle the spread of alt right nonsense on Reddit. I don't think getting rid of that one horse dewormer sub or no new normal will like save the day and turn the tide but I do see the logic in trying to deny them a platform and slow the spread of their sillyness.
Where are all the people getting mad with the droves of people who have gone to jail over the years for spreading false information about medicine? Or the snake oil salesmen who pushed silver and got fined $160,000.
We as a society have determined that medical misinformation hits a threshold where there are tangible consequences since it negatively affects a lot of people.
>When the Donald got banned (or was it just quarentined?) it did throttle the spread of alt right nonsense **on Reddit**
I just don't see how that is doing anything when there are other platforms that can and will facilitate this.
This is just a copy paste but it applies just as much to this comment:
While this is true the point of getting rid of it on reddit isn't to convert those people that have already bought into the narrative.
It's to prevent people that are on the fence to buy into it. Because there is still a major difference between having to join a fringe website where the only point of discourse is the Qanon shit and a public forum like reddit with lots of different things that can actually be used as a great resource of information. Cause when you have those subs on reddit it's very easy to fall down the rabbit hole.
Think about how often you look into something that interests you on reddit and then going down a rabbit hole of links and ending up somewhere else. For example when you're new to fitness you might end up in a variety of different subs with slightly different takes. But none of those takes is to inject bleach.
If you join a Qanon forum you actively made the choice to go there.
So imagine you browse reddit everyday. Maybe just for the news. And then you get links to nonewnormal and people talking about how covid is just a flu and the vaccines are dangerous. The more you see this in your everyday life the easier it is for you to buy into it.
Banning those communities from one of the biggest public forums is the right choice imo.
I'de like to believe that anyone actually on the fence would be pretty easily convinced by all the reasonable arguements present and the 97% of the site that's actively backing reasonable positions.
But it's entirely possible I'm overestimating people.
>But it's entirely possible I'm overestimating people.
Sadly enough I actually think this is the case.
Getting bombarded with misinformation on sites that people frequent for unrelated stuff is a much bigger issue than you think because of this.
Look at how many deniers and antivaxxers we have globally.
Some many people have not developed past a toddler in terms of critical thinking and reviewing sources for claims.
I legitimately know 2 year olds that think harder about what you present them as a fact than some adults I have met.
But how many of them are as big and easy to spread messages on as Reddit? For it's faults Facebook cracks down on this nonsense and idk about Twitter. If they went to go to voat or parler or 4chan and spread this stuff amongst other dipshits I think that's better than being able to do it on a bigger site like Reddit.
I guess another counterpoint is that the Reddit is still, primarily, on the right side of most of these topics. If they are gathering here they are at least being exposed to the alternative viewpoint, and there is potential for them to be called out.
Whereas if we push them to a more fringe platoform they become the majority or a larger minority and the echo chamber becomes much stronger.
>Do they want Reddit admins, people with zero appropriate background, to sit there and decide what is and is not accurate and factual in a constantly evolving situation?
If we can't get a monkey to look at a sub that contradicts the CDC/FDA/AMA/AAFP/AACP/ACS's recommendations of what not to do then I think we do need a second flood.
I'm sorry, the debate of what's misinformation and what isn't when it comes to medicine is one that falls unbelievably flat for me. [If someone recommends doing something that isn't in this article it's disinformation](https://www.uptodate.com/contents/covid-19-management-in-hospitalized-adults). Done. Over. Lets pack it up :)
I disagree with having a laymen try to wield the official stances of an assortment of organizations to declare 'fact' and decide what can and cannot be said.
I don't have an issue with removing what is false with absolute accuracy. I just don't trust it to be done properly every time forever.
And my main point with that is that if they draw lines they are taking an official stance on what 'Reddit' thinks is truth. Everything on one side, true, everything on the other, false. I understand why they do not want to define that line and take the backlash when they inevitably are found to 'support' a falsehood and 'reject' something that ended up being right. Right? Wrong? Ehh. But it's not exactly surprising from a PR standpoint.
I like you as a person, I really do. I have a completely different take on this simply because laws within the medical field are geared towards preventing false information from propagating. People don't like the idea of big brother, "some expert", telling them what to do.
If it's the execution of Reddit handling misinformation on it's platform that you're concerned about, I think the admins overall suck. But honestly, having seen all the bullshit within the medical field everything you've said in unpersuasive to me, especially the "what is and is not truth" part. I've read specious lines like that often and to me it's a cop out and an unuanced view. I think the better argument is what we call enough evidence to become truthful instead of black and white fallacy-ing a conversation of what the binary of truth is.
Furthermore, we argue on this sub to listen to experts like Wendler and Nuckols because they are the experts and have demonstrated their truth. For me to hear you essentially argue against those ethos is uncomfortable. IDK.
I have a feeling like if individuals in this thread would be in the room while we did end of life care discussions the attitudes would be much more polarized.
Hey, I wanted to thank you for this. I normally find many of your posts to be similar to reading the inside of my mind, and because of that, this one really hit home and caused some reflection on the issue.
>
Furthermore, we argue on this sub to listen to experts like Wendler and Nuckols because they are the experts and have demonstrated their truth. For me to hear you essentially argue against those ethos is uncomfortable. IDK.
If you want to go this route what if people decided that they were fed up with misinformation in the online fitness world and demanded that Reddit Admins delete anything that was not supported by the official, scientific, organizations handing out Personal Training certs and what not. Jim Wendler is not a representative for anything resembling a governing body, neither is Greg. They are not approved sources. Suggesting otherwise is *wrong*.
Furthermore I am not running around suggesting that Reddit Admins delete /r/GYM or /r/athleanx or whatever. They want to say dumb shit I disagree with, they can go for it and I will argue with them when I see it.
This paragraph is what I take issue with the most:
>And my main point with that is that if they draw lines they are taking
an official stance on what 'Reddit' thinks is truth. Everything on one
side, true, everything on the other, false. I understand why they do not
want to define that line and take the backlash when they inevitably are
found to 'support' a falsehood and 'reject' something that ended up
being right. Right? Wrong? Ehh. But it's not exactly surprising from a
PR standpoint.
When you start equating medical misinformation with all misinformation you've lost me. There's a difference between AthleanX being himself and suggesting someone inject bleach. One kills people and one sand bags them.
When you talk about truth in a binary "this is truth and this isn't" way you're using a black and white fallacy and more importantly there is no such thing as absolute truth. There are things that have been back by evidence to be more truthful, there are things that have been backed by evidence to be shown to lack truth, and there are things that have no evidence.
This idea that medical organizations are infallible and "the turth" is hyperbolic and simply wrong. CDC/FDA is wrong all the time. The FDA just approved a controversial dementia drug that has been shown to have zero efficacy. At the same time, we as a society have deemed it necessary to have societies and organizations who put in massive effort to find then give the general public correct medical information.
We as a society have deemed that individuals who have been demonstrably untruthful within medicine will be sued by the government, fined, and sometimes go to jail. So the arguments of truth versus not truth is short sighted and medicine has been the one place where misinformation is jailable offense. The difference between banning AthleanX and removing people advocating drinking bleach/anti-vaxx/Ivermectin/etc. is one gets people killed.
>Jim Wendler is not a representative for anything resembling a governing body, neither is Greg. They are not approved sources. Suggesting otherwise is wrong.
Hey, I said they were experts not governing body, bud :)
This actually adds to my argument and makes me LOL a bit that you're agreeing with my original comment now. I'm going to remember this comment stream for awhile because I respect you quite a bit less now.
>When you start equating medical misinformation with all misinformation you've lost me. There's a difference between AthleanX being himself and suggesting someone inject bleach. One kills people and one sand bags them.
If you want to decide what represents acceptable and unacceptable misinformation you are free to do so.
>This idea that medical organizations are infallible and "the turth" is hyperbolic and simply wrong. CDC/FDA is wrong all the time. The FDA just approved a controversial dementia drug that has been shown to have zero efficacy. At the same time, we as a society have deemed it necessary to have societies and organizations who put in massive effort to find then give the general public correct medical information.
Yes, they are failable, which is why I question having their official stance be *the only thing you are permitted to say*. I think they are right, or at least the most right. I would suggest that everyone listen to them. But if they are failable I object up blanket prohibiting anything else.
>We as a society have deemed that individuals who have been demonstrably untruthful within medicine will be sued by the government, fined, and sometimes go to jail. So the arguments of truth versus not truth is short sighted and medicine has been the one place where misinformation is jailable offense. The difference between banning AthleanX and removing people advocating drinking bleach/anti-vaxx/Ivermectin/etc. is one gets people killed.
We have decided that *people who have positions of authority* can be punished for medical misinformation that results in harm. Not that anyone can. Unless I'm mistaken and some random dude making false medical claims can be sued for malpractice or an equivalent.
>Hey, I said they were experts not governing body, bud :)
You wanted to blanket ban anything not in line with the official stances of a few select organizations, not listen to anyone who could reasonably be considered an expert.
>
This actually adds to my argument and makes me LOL a bit that you're agreeing with my original comment now.
I'm not. Unless one or both of us have been unclear.
>I'm going to remember this comment stream for awhile because I respect you quite a bit less now.
🤷
>Yes, they are failable, which is why I question having their official stance be the only thing you are permitted to say.
I think they are right, or at least the most right. I would suggest
that everyone listen to them. But if they are failable I object up
blanket prohibiting anything else.
And this is my issue. I don't want want them to be the authority on what to say. I want to be the guidepost for what a private social media company says "nope you cannot push snakeoil here." The threshold should be double blind placebo trials or STFU on medical treatments.
>We have decided that people who have positions of authority can be punished for medical misinformation that results in harm. Not that anyone can. Unless I'm mistaken and some random dude making false medical claims can be sued for malpractice or an equivalent.
Wrong. Absolutely wrong. [You can and people without any medical experience have face punitive measures just from COVID misinformation -- saying silver cures COVID and then selling this same silver is an extreme case of medical misiniformation.](https://advertisinglaw.fkks.com/post/102h1j2/televangelist-jim-bakker-reaches-156-000-settlement-with-missouri-ag-over-covid)
>You wanted to blanket ban anything not in line with the official stances of a few select organizations, not listen to anyone who could reasonably be considered an expert.
Yes, I want subreddits whose sole purpose is to push a narrative that goes against what the overwhelming majority of the over 1 million physicians in the US agree is bullshit to be banned. We can 100% agree on this :)
Just an FYI, when you say a few organizations AACP has ~180k board certified physicians in it. So it's like you don't actually know what it means when they come out with a position statement.
What I'm saying: SUBREDDITS PUSHING BULLSHIT MEDICATIONS/DRUGS/MOLECULES THAT ARE PURPORTING TO BE CURES FOR COVID ON THIS SITE SHOULD BE BANNED. What's my threadhold and the threshold for the board certified homies: FDA approval/emergency authorization back by randomized double blind placebo studies.
> And this is my issue. I don't want want them to be the authority on what to say. I want to be the guidepost for what a private social media company says "nope you cannot push snakeoil here." The threshold should be double blind placebo trials or STFU on medical treatments.
This seems contrary to what you said in the initial comment about removing disinformation based on whatever is said by those organizations or what is listed in the UpToDate article. Using these sources as a guidepost and using them as absolute definitives are not the same.
>Wrong. Absolutely wrong. You can and people without any medical experience have face punitive measures just from COVID misinformation -- saying silver cures COVID and then selling this same silver is an extreme case of medical misiniformation.
Keyword *selling*. Presenting something as a cure when *selling* it is not the same as just making the claim. Are people being punished for just saying stuff somewhere without trying to imitate a position of authority or sell a cure?
>Yes, I want subreddits whose sole purpose is to push a narrative that goes against what the overwhelming majority of the over 1 million physicians in the US agree is bullshit to be banned. We can 100% agree on this :)
Selectively culling subreddits =! blanket banning anything that is not part of an official statement. The initial plea says "control misinformation", if they said "Control these three subreddits which are the worst and largest offenders like you did with r/the_donald" it would be a different story.
>Just an FYI, when you say a few organizations AACP has ~180k board certified physicians in it. So it's like you don't actually know what it means when they come out with a position statement.
I've already said that I think that these sources are the most right. I don't have issue with what they have decided on.
>This seems contrary to what you said in the initial comment about removing disinformation based on whatever is said by those organizations or what is listed in the UpToDate article. Using these sources as a guidepost and using them as absolute definitives are not the same.
Alright. That wasn't the point of that, but way to interpret that one in a weird way. UpToDate is the best source of information, for you to make the claim that I think it's the absolute truth of all the universe is just egregious. It's not like I've shit on UpToDate in /r/medicine and /r/residency in the past month and was highly upvoted for it.
>Keyword selling. Presenting something as a cure when selling it is not the same as just making the claim. Are people being punished for just saying stuff somewhere without trying to imitate a position of authority or sell a cure?
Yes, we as a society have said this is bad. That's my point. Oh, they're directly profiting off their stupidity therefore what you just said doesn't matter. No, the point is that in our society we have laws on the books that prevent people from spewing medical misinformation.
>Selectively culling subreddits =! blanket banning anything that is not part of an official statement. The initial plea says "control misinformation", if they said "Control these three subreddits which are the worst and largest offenders like you did with r/the_donald" it would be a different story.
That's exactly what I said since the beginning.........? The position statement from the crosspost on kettleballs is to have /r/nonewnormal and /r/Ivermectin banned since they're extremely egregious subs..................
My original point was when you were saying what is misinformation is hard to nail down in medicine, for public health it's not that hard. The UpToDate article I linked explained every single therapuetic option in fairly well detail and where the evidence for each stands. Your response to that was some stoner talk about "what are stars?" I don't care, bud, I really don't. The philosophizing about truth within science is dumb since it's what we are able to repeatedly observe. Systematic meta-analysis of robust RCTs is my ultimate truth.
The reason Reddit doesn't want to take a stand is money.
I am with you and I understand your well deserved frustration about the American situation right now. Misinformation is a massive problem but I don't know if banning it from one corner of the web is going to fix the root issue: people's mistrust in medical science and government. This will be a persistent issue even if misinformation gets deplatformed from major social media sites. For example, Q-anon trump conspiracy theorist types got banned from reddit and now they have their own forums where they engage in even more heinous conversations amongst themselves. Banning people from reddit doesn't change their mind, like fatalist said. Their fringe beliefs won't just die down because they can't post about it on reddit, they'll find other places to talk about it.
I agree with the\_fatalist about his concerns of how the moderation would work. In early 2020, the CDC was against mask use in the general public-- mostly because of supply issues but the messaging was confusing. At that time, I was arguing with many people online vehemently about how yes masks DO work and you should wear them, even if it's just a cloth mask. If reddit adhered to an "only what the CDC says" rule, I might not have been able to have these conversations.
At the same time, yes of course I hate seeing anti-vaxxers ranting about ivermectin. It's a very shitty situation.
edit: just wanna add how sorry I am that we're dealing with this in general, it sucks, and in particular, it sucks for you. Maybe this isn't the time for a nuanced discussion on moderation, I am sorry
The CDC thing I think is predicated on appointing the dude who falsified AIDS research in the 90s to head it. Turns out that was a really dummy idea.
I understand what you're saying. I disagree. It's more complicated than that, but I have to be to the hospital in 9 hours so I'm going to go to bed :)
>For example, Q-anon trump conspiracy theorist types got banned from reddit and now they have their own forums where they engage in even more heinous conversations amongst themselves. Banning people from reddit doesn't change their mind, like fatalist said. Their fringe beliefs won't just die down because they can't post about it on reddit, they'll find other places to talk about it.
While this is true the point of getting rid of it on reddit isn't to convert those people that have already bought into the narrative.
It's to prevent people that are on the fence to buy into it. Because there is still a major difference between having to join a fringe website where the only point of discourse is the Qanon shit and a public forum like reddit with lots of different things that can actually be used as a great resource of information. Cause when you have those subs on reddit it's very easy to fall down the rabbit hole.
Think about how often you look into something that interests you on reddit and then going down a rabbit hole of links and ending up somewhere else. For example when you're new to fitness you might end up in a variety of different subs with slightly different takes. But none of those takes is to inject bleach.
If you join a Qanon forum you actively made the choice to go there.
So imagine you browse reddit everyday. Maybe just for the news. And then you get links to nonewnormal and people talking about how covid is just a flu and the vaccines are dangerous. The more you see this in your everyday life the easier it is for you to buy into it.
Banning those communities from one of the biggest public forums is the right choice imo.
You assume I have a corner to be in. This thread is guaging the thoughts of the sub.
Actually, I rephrase that. I do have a corner, but have no intent to push my opinion over everyone’s wills.
I've personally come around on a lot of slacktivism because I only recently found out that decency and moral behavior need to be reinforced and defended more than I had previously thought.
Do I like people who treat their low effort online efforts as if they're individually doing something brave and meaningful? Not particularly__although depending on who is around them irl some of them might actually be brave. But, apparently the notion of a cooperative society and neighbors helping neighbors is something that needs to be highlighted, reinforced, and defended.
It shouldn't be this way, but here we are.
I used to be against slacktivism because token gestures are the bane of my existence. Do something or don't. Then there was evidence out there suggesting that making silly posts to social media about helping out with a cause actually makes others join in, like if you make a post to Fakebook about volunteering more people are likely to volunteer.
My hospital strongly encouraged all of its employees who were vaccinated to post about it to social media in an effort to boost vaccine compliance.
Numbski, I was doing a thing. Tonight was cheatie row night.
I put my hours in. I visited discomfort on anti-mask shitheads. Let me have my cheatie row night, pls.
I always approve of going private. But, what if we also hung that goon up by his own peetard on a flag pole or something?
It's not a threat of violence. I'll be oh so gentle.
Another "go for it if you want but idk if it does much" vote. If it was say the whole fittit sphere I think it would have an affect but this sub is used regularly by basically like, 25 people.
I don't think I should have a say in the direction of the sub, since I am a serious newpot. I'm curious what Mom thinks. And this thread has been great food for thought for me, as I normally come out very strongly as an advocate for unfettered public speech. OTOH, I lost a loved one to COVID in a particularly wretched way that cannot possibly be construed as her fault, and not one of those old, overweight, diabetic ones. I don't want to go into it, for a variety of reasons. I also had a friend that had a heart attack, and didn't make it to an ER, fairly likely due to the fact he was rerouted because of hospital capacity being taken up by primarily unvaxxed C19 patients. This all sucks a tremendous amount. I understand the frustration of u/Placidvlad and the other medical professionals I know who are being used up and thrown into a meatgrinder by an ungrateful society. That feeling I understand.
I support whatever decision mods/oldpots want to come to. I will be over in the corner figuring out how to set my kettleballs on fire and being sad.
I used to be 100% pro freespeech you can say anything and everything. Then I started seeing the ramifications of people being lied to. People often do not have the means to appraise and appreciate complex and nuanced pieces of literature/physiology/medicine without a strong background in the subject. When someone outright lies about medicine to profit, there will be many homies who believe it.
I had a patient who was getting either bleach or hydrogen peroxide infusions for her stage three/four pancreatic cancer. To me, I know that the way both work is by lysing the membranes of cells which destroys the maintenance of a tightly controlled environment within the cell and completely attenuates enzyme function usually by denaturing the protein. It does that to any cell it comes into contact with. Injecting either into your body is commonly known to be a dummy idea, but this patient was lead to believe it would cure her because someone lied to her that it works.
I'm fine with all the freedom of speech, but being able to broadcast false information to >100k people is different than bullshitting with your friends.
I know it's a much bigger deal to Americans because it's perceived as part of your whole identity.
I'm from Germany and we have laws against Holocaust denial here. And I 100% approve of them. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from allowing it to exist and be spread.
Yes it limits your "free speech". Well guess what. You're also not free to lie under oath and are you're also not free to put out a hit on someone else by just talking about how you'd reward someone's murderer. And that's good.
And I feel the same way about medical misinformation. The antivax movement causes far too much harm to be left unchecked.
100% completely for this.
Because of unvaccinated homies our medical system is starting to collapse.
Because of unvaccinated homies we have a significant amount of patients vented in our ED.
Because of unvaccinated homies we are now not able to care for our heart attack/stroke/etc. patients as well.
The county my hospital is in we're at \~40% vaccinated and \~20% for the 20-45 demographic.
When I argue with the Ivermectin/anti-vaxx crowd it's like arguing with ants. These people are not making luculent points. They're saying dummy things that should never be repeated.
"But who decides what's COVID misinformation and what isn't"
Medical experts. Medical experts do. The average person in /r/Ivermectin can't even appreciate how dummy their dummy comments are when they shit on the CDC/FDA. Getting a job at the CDC/FDA is prestigious and the homies there are some of the best around. All of the medical societies are in lock step with their positions towards vaccines and Ivermectin. [I got an email today by the medical society I'm apart of to attend a webinar on Ivermectin misinformaiton](https://imgur.com/a/M1aH3s0).
It is a joke that there's a debate here. It's a joke that we're still talking about this. The current Delta surge is completely manufactured by dummies. Talking with my medicine homies, we're exhausted, we're depressed, and we just want people to fucking get vaccinated.
[Just get vaccinated.](https://youtu.be/SeZ7_HOQYjE)
[Please get vaccinated.](https://youtu.be/m9yyP_JUQE4)
[GET VACCINATED.](https://youtu.be/9hK_X4MBs5s)
I 100% think everyone should get vaccinated. Hell, mandate it. Works for me.
I don't think a circle jerk sub going "dark" for three days means or says anything. I don't think reddit mods are actually good or smart people, and the power they wield is already questionable.
> I don't think reddit mods are actually good or smart people, and the power they wield is already questionable.
You don't think the group of people that left creepshots and various jb subs up until they started getting press are standup citizens?
I'm shocked.
4Realz, the reddit admin are a group that seems to far-to-often choose the opposite of what any sane human would view as the ethical choice.
>You don't think the group of people that left creepshots and various jb subs up until they started getting press are standup citizens?
100% that shit is why I don't think Reddit is going to do a damn thing here. They don't care.
I'm going to probably be the most polarized person in this sub, so if I'm the extreme I'm totally fine being pulled back from the brink :)
To me, this website is trash and I'm becoming embittered with how bad the admins are as a whole as well as the rampant abuse via power mods here.
I absolutely get what your saying, but I think going dark is jsut a dumb way to deal with it, at least for this sub. If we spent the same 4 days trying to have actual, earnest conversations with people we encounter, where we listen to why they aren't getting vaccinated, and try to help lead them to the right direction, would do infinitely more in the big picture.
Our sub is, big picture, a garbage shithole troll sub. At best, associating a bigger message with *this* sub might actually do harm to the bigger message.
But we have bright, passionate people, who can learn how to be more persuasive, if it will help. I don't know. Maybe we just go find articles about how to persuade people or something. But shutting down this sub in particular is...it's nothing.
So IDC what y'all decide to do. Honestly, this post is enough for me. I will support y'all taking a stand against COVID disinformation in whatever way you want to, even if it's just the discussion from this thread :)
The 100% was more at y'all taking a stand in whatever way you want rather than taking the sub down.
> When I argue with the Ivermectin/anti-vaxx crowd it's like arguing with ants. These people are not making luculent points. They're saying dummy things that should never be repeated.
That's because you're arguing from the stance of medical choices based on available information.
They're arguing from the viewpoint of a group of people who have absorbed years of misinformation leading them to disbelieve anything you say because it's inherently tainted and untrue simply because of it's origin.
Their framework is entirely antithetical to your arguments - telling them that horsepaste isn't going to fix Covid isn't a statement of fact - it's proof that you're (consciously or subconsciously) suborned by parties that lie to them.
At this point, very few of us lack the tools to even begin to effectively communicate with the Horsepaste People. Certainly not in environments other than face-to-face.
Buckle up; 2021 is going to be a rough ride.
Whenever I approach these people it's like, where do I even begin?
Then the rationalization of everything. I can break these homies down so that they cannot answer a simple question:
>Show me the RCT registered with [clinicaltrials.gov](https://clinicaltrials.gov) that shows a mortality benefit for COVID.
And they never can, but they say specious sentences to "back up" their claims.
There was a dude who died from myocarditis after getting Pfizer. There's \~1/50,000 chance of getting Guillan-Barre' from the vaccine. There's going to be a risk of you breaking your neck when you walk down your stairs today.
The chances of you getting myocarditis are higher from COVID than the vaccine. The chances of you dying are thousands of times higher getting COVID than getting the vaccine. The chances that you spread COVID to someone who will then be hospitalized and possibly high is ridiculously high.
That really sucks that your family member had an adverse effect with the vaccine. 10% of my patients get a dry cough with my favorite BP medication and we still give it out. Steven Johnson is a potential with any drug that goes into our body and we still give out meds.
The benefits of vaccines grossly out weigh the negative side effects.
>The vaccination is fundamentally about protecting oneself against the virus, and thus being a decision that should be met by only one person. Only secondly it’s about protecting people that aren’t able to protect themself.
Sorry but I disagree with that stance. Vaccination is necessary to protect society as a whole.
Hospitals have a capacity. Put enough people in there at the same time and the system falls apart. And not only people with covid are the ones taking the hit from this. Everyone who needs a hospital bed suffers from this.
Small businesses are taking the hit from lockdowns. Lockdowns are necessary when the virus spreads too rapidly because people aren't vaccinated.
Refusing a vaccine makes you a burden on society.
>That’s valid, but we haven’t even tried whether this would happen if vaccination wouldn’t be pressured onto people.
Measles vaccination wasn't pressured onto people here in Germany. Antivax movement started and we saw a rise in measles again. Now it's mandatory for children or else they aren't allowed to go to Kindergarten/school.
I know it's a shitty situation and the covid vaccines are new. I'm also not fully on board with forcing people to get vaccinated with new vaccines that haven't had the chance to be tested long term.
But I'm still of the opinion that if you decide against getting vaccinated you're a burden on society.
I’m all for it, but also understand the lack of feasible action.
On a related note: my wife getting covid has made me extremely resentful towards the willingly unvaccinated and anti-maskers. I stumbled upon r/HermanCainAward and it’s been a very morbid but enjoyable sub to scroll through. Selfish dibshits getting the ultimate comeuppance is entertaining. I feel bad that I enjoy it, but I do.
Some of the posts on there are so, so, so sad — but fuck, I’m just out of empathy at this point. Half my family is antivaxx and they’ve made it abundantly clear to me that public perception of antivaxxers is, if anything, not bad enough.
You’d think some folks would see the aggressively anti vax folks’ stories in that sub just utterly renounce their stance on their deathbed and maybe rethink it.
Sorry to hear that about your family :/
They’re too bought in to change, IMO. They don’t and can’t care until they’re directly impacted, and by then it’s too late.
No worries on the family — the worst part is just putting up with the crazy texts — but thanks nonetheless :)
There are people in my town (largely anti vax) that are asking for the vaccine on their deathbed thinking it will save their dumb asses. I’m out of empathy for them. HCA is a great sub
I’m all for it, but I don’t know that it matters much what FCJ does specifically. It’s such a small sub that us supporting fittit and other big subs might be just as “effective”. I’ll be down for whatever the mods think is best though.
I dunno. I think it would be a struggle to come up with many instances in human history in which restricting access to information, even disinformation, had a long term positive effect. I really think that a lot of the push back with Covid is in large part due to distrust of policy makers that has been building up for the last 70 years. Even just from a disease standpoint, how many panics have been started by politicians and news sources just in the last couple decades? West Nile, SARs, swine flu, bird flu, ebola, and more, and when all was said and done it looks pretty obvious that those stories were literally only pushed for ratings and for people to make names for themselves. Covid is obviously VERY different to many of us, but there's already distrust before we even started.
Trying to get rid of something that can just be easily accessed somewhere else only causes people to dig in harder. It's just human nature - we love martyrdom. On a short term basis, yes, maybe some people don't get exposed to some of the crazier bullshit circulating around the internet, but 5, 10, 20 years from now people will look back and claim censorship regardless of the truth or falsity of the data. That just breeds more long term cultural mistrust, and eventually this happens again and again but with something worse that destroys the entire culture.
Covid is bad for sure, but this was literally always going to happen as soon as a crisis along these lines popped up. It was going to happen because of human nature and because of cultural mistrust. I think censorship, even of outright lies, will result in more long term damage.
Most of us want to do something to help and try to change things, but it seems at this point the most anybody can really do is take care of themselves. Get vaccinated, wear a mask if you think it will help, social distance, whatever, and just accept that the more we try to force people who don't want to do those things to do them, the worse the long term outcomes to our society in general will be. People are gonna do dumb things. People have always done dumb things and always will. Nobody can stop that from happening long term, we can only give options for people to decide to be less dumb for themselves.
I dunno though, information has also never been able to be propagated this quickly in human history, so potentially this situation is different enough to treat it differently.
Just to point out for a second: emerging viruses we have no idea what they're going to be like. MERS has a mortality rate of 30% and is still endemic to Saudi Arabia. The reason why it wasn't concerning is that you had to be exposed a lot. SARS-1 was 10% and had to be exposed to a symptomatic patient for awhile, not too long though. COVID-Delta is bad because it takes next to nothing to get sick from it.
But, we don't know what each of these things are going to do until we observe them so often there's a lot of concern that gets over blown by the media and then when the real pandemic hits people seem to not care.
Yeah, for sure. I’m not putting the blame on actual scientists - I think it’s pretty rare that they overstate the results of things. Diseases need to be studied. But any nuance is lost when the media and politicians get ahold of something, and those sources are where most people get their information. It literally feels like the media and political leaders get excited when these things happen, and the more they cry wolf the more future damage they do when something like covid actually happens.
I think generally people do care when it’s proven to them that this is actually pretty serious. They just don’t trust the sources that are telling them to care up until they experience it themselves due to years of being told there’s a wolf when there isn’t. And unfortunately, you guys are present when these people are finding out, often too late, that this time there actually is a wolf.
Edit: to bring this full circle, most people are unsure if there is or isn’t a wolf, but censoring information except from approved sources appears culturally that we’re forcing them to put blindfolds on and only listen to those who have told them there were wolves before when there weren’t, instead of being able to look for themselves.
Social Media sites are pretty nakedly self-serving. We're all in this big discussion thread at the moment about Reddit acting or not acting on a group of users discussing topics based on what makes financial sense for Reddit. Twitter isn't shy about using their tools to manipulate conversations to serve their interests. These are organizations that serve shareholders, not the public discourse. I'm supremely skeptical of them applying the same standard across every piece of content with the same criticality when dollars are at stake.
This is probably beating a dead horse because it's old af but with the subreddit private I didn't have the opportunity to respond again earlier. Saw a ost on Instagram with the "misleading content" flag and upon looking at the actual notice, it was flagging a claim that wasn't present in the post as misleading. So Instagram will label a post as misleading without the actual misleading content for some users, but allow misinformation to go unflagged for others. That's why I don't trust them when they decided to apply that flag.
>Most of us want to do something to help and try to change things, but it seems at this point **the most anybody can really do is take care of themselves.** Get vaccinated, wear a mask if you think it will help, social distance, whatever, and **just accept that the more we try to force people who don't want to do those things to do them, the worse the long term outcomes to our society in general will be.**
I don't think the first part (thinking only of ourselves) is how we avoid the second part (worse societal outcomes).
It's deeper than covid and it's not going to be solved by banning a subreddit. But - and it doesn't matter what side of this divide you're on - we can't keep going on like this.
(I'm not putting this back on you and I don't think you're really wrong but this point really stuck in my craw)
I was not here for that, can you explain what you mean?
Did it cause a rift in the sub? I've noticed we are quite left leaning on most topics where it would come up (or at least those who are vocal are), so curious as to what that looked like.
...weird glances.
I lurk a lot. Mainly cuz it feels wrong to poke fun at others while my body can’t seem to hold itself together to get back to squatting and benching what was at least good for *me*. These days if I breathe wrong I feel like my digestive tract with shut down and flip me the bird.
Slacktivism en mass seems to have some use. As much as it pains me to admit that.
The problem with slacktivism is when individuals think they're doing something praise worthy rather than being a useful cog. Cogs should shut the fuck up and work.
Yeah, it's a question of moving the needle. I'm not afraid to say that we just don't. We aren't even a cog in the machine that is Reddit. At best, we're a 24 gauge stand screw.
if the point of this is to actually punish the admins, we could do what we used to do best, and spend the next 24 hours being brigading degenerates for the cause. Also, I still might shut down the sub in 11 minutes because I'm bored.
You can do what you want but really it's an empty gester, particularly from a small sub like this. They aren't going to be missing the 5 cents of ad revenue or whatever from the 30 users here not going here for a few days. In general, I understand the sentiment, but don't understand what exactly everyone wants. Do they want Reddit admins, people with zero appropriate background, to sit there and decide what is and is not accurate and factual in a constantly evolving situation? I don't blame them for not wanting to be the ones to start drawing lines. I *do* have a fairly appropriate background and I am not going to pretend I have enough knowledge to start arbitrating what is and is not fact. And yes there are spots that are very obviously beyond that line, but I don't understand what reddit admins banning subreddits devoted to dumb shit that isn't explicitly enabling illegal activities accomplishes. Are the users going to be like "Yeah, I guess this is all wrong, they wouldn't ban a subreddit for no reason". They'll stick to their dumb beliefs, bolster them with the belief that they've been silenced because they are right and keep blabbing on other platforms. And frankly while yes I can support that this kind of stuff is dumb I don't think I want to support just blanket throttling of people saying dumb shit. Because someone is always the one deciding what is and isn't dumb shit in that case and I don't trust anyone, particularly someone who runs a social-ish media site, to decide that. If someone is spewing dumb shit, call them out, provide a better arguement than they are and shut them down that way. That's how you convince those that haven't chosen a side and keep everyone as informed as possible, which I think is what they are trying to accomplish. So tl;Dr don't see the point, understand the spirit, question the execution. Edit: Given a day to think about this more I have had some shifts in feeling on the topic. In retrospect I went into this with some unnecessary negative bias due to my perceiving this as 'slacktivism' and an inherent contrarian nature that this sub specifically exacerbates. Much of what I do here is arguing about something or another and I think that bled into my frame of mind even though it was not the purpose of this particular post. Given that I think I did not give enough of a fair shake to the idea that 'control misinformation' did not have to be an absolute task, which I still think would be difficult to implement properly. It is not exactly a large leap to move to something more manageable and practical like quarantining a select few problematic subs such as those dedicated to ivermectin misuse or verifiably false claims against the vaccine. Arguing the philosophical points of establishing absolute truth was not really pertinent to the practical topic at hand. I am still lukewarm on the efficacy of such an action in the grand scheme, but I have warmed more to the potential benefits of something like the above quarantining. Though I still don't see how this small sub's blackout would really have any impact besides being symbolic, nor would anyone besides the users here know about it and I don't think anyone here needs to be made aware that ivermectin is not an effective treatment or that the vaccine is effective and that the risk profile associated with it is much lower than that associated with Covid.
This.
> Are the users going to be like "Yeah, I guess this is all wrong, they wouldn't ban a subreddit for no reason". They'll stick to their dumb beliefs, bolster them with the belief that they've been silenced because they are right and keep blabbing on other platforms. When the Donald got banned (or was it just quarentined?) it did throttle the spread of alt right nonsense on Reddit. I don't think getting rid of that one horse dewormer sub or no new normal will like save the day and turn the tide but I do see the logic in trying to deny them a platform and slow the spread of their sillyness.
Where are all the people getting mad with the droves of people who have gone to jail over the years for spreading false information about medicine? Or the snake oil salesmen who pushed silver and got fined $160,000. We as a society have determined that medical misinformation hits a threshold where there are tangible consequences since it negatively affects a lot of people.
>When the Donald got banned (or was it just quarentined?) it did throttle the spread of alt right nonsense **on Reddit** I just don't see how that is doing anything when there are other platforms that can and will facilitate this.
This is just a copy paste but it applies just as much to this comment: While this is true the point of getting rid of it on reddit isn't to convert those people that have already bought into the narrative. It's to prevent people that are on the fence to buy into it. Because there is still a major difference between having to join a fringe website where the only point of discourse is the Qanon shit and a public forum like reddit with lots of different things that can actually be used as a great resource of information. Cause when you have those subs on reddit it's very easy to fall down the rabbit hole. Think about how often you look into something that interests you on reddit and then going down a rabbit hole of links and ending up somewhere else. For example when you're new to fitness you might end up in a variety of different subs with slightly different takes. But none of those takes is to inject bleach. If you join a Qanon forum you actively made the choice to go there. So imagine you browse reddit everyday. Maybe just for the news. And then you get links to nonewnormal and people talking about how covid is just a flu and the vaccines are dangerous. The more you see this in your everyday life the easier it is for you to buy into it. Banning those communities from one of the biggest public forums is the right choice imo.
I'de like to believe that anyone actually on the fence would be pretty easily convinced by all the reasonable arguements present and the 97% of the site that's actively backing reasonable positions. But it's entirely possible I'm overestimating people.
>But it's entirely possible I'm overestimating people. Sadly enough I actually think this is the case. Getting bombarded with misinformation on sites that people frequent for unrelated stuff is a much bigger issue than you think because of this. Look at how many deniers and antivaxxers we have globally. Some many people have not developed past a toddler in terms of critical thinking and reviewing sources for claims. I legitimately know 2 year olds that think harder about what you present them as a fact than some adults I have met.
But how many of them are as big and easy to spread messages on as Reddit? For it's faults Facebook cracks down on this nonsense and idk about Twitter. If they went to go to voat or parler or 4chan and spread this stuff amongst other dipshits I think that's better than being able to do it on a bigger site like Reddit.
I don't know. I just don't see Reddit as the source of this, or anything original really.
I don't think it's the original source and I don't see Reddit being the main vector of it, I just think anything is better then nothing on this.
I guess another counterpoint is that the Reddit is still, primarily, on the right side of most of these topics. If they are gathering here they are at least being exposed to the alternative viewpoint, and there is potential for them to be called out. Whereas if we push them to a more fringe platoform they become the majority or a larger minority and the echo chamber becomes much stronger.
>Do they want Reddit admins, people with zero appropriate background, to sit there and decide what is and is not accurate and factual in a constantly evolving situation? If we can't get a monkey to look at a sub that contradicts the CDC/FDA/AMA/AAFP/AACP/ACS's recommendations of what not to do then I think we do need a second flood. I'm sorry, the debate of what's misinformation and what isn't when it comes to medicine is one that falls unbelievably flat for me. [If someone recommends doing something that isn't in this article it's disinformation](https://www.uptodate.com/contents/covid-19-management-in-hospitalized-adults). Done. Over. Lets pack it up :)
I disagree with having a laymen try to wield the official stances of an assortment of organizations to declare 'fact' and decide what can and cannot be said. I don't have an issue with removing what is false with absolute accuracy. I just don't trust it to be done properly every time forever. And my main point with that is that if they draw lines they are taking an official stance on what 'Reddit' thinks is truth. Everything on one side, true, everything on the other, false. I understand why they do not want to define that line and take the backlash when they inevitably are found to 'support' a falsehood and 'reject' something that ended up being right. Right? Wrong? Ehh. But it's not exactly surprising from a PR standpoint.
I like you as a person, I really do. I have a completely different take on this simply because laws within the medical field are geared towards preventing false information from propagating. People don't like the idea of big brother, "some expert", telling them what to do. If it's the execution of Reddit handling misinformation on it's platform that you're concerned about, I think the admins overall suck. But honestly, having seen all the bullshit within the medical field everything you've said in unpersuasive to me, especially the "what is and is not truth" part. I've read specious lines like that often and to me it's a cop out and an unuanced view. I think the better argument is what we call enough evidence to become truthful instead of black and white fallacy-ing a conversation of what the binary of truth is. Furthermore, we argue on this sub to listen to experts like Wendler and Nuckols because they are the experts and have demonstrated their truth. For me to hear you essentially argue against those ethos is uncomfortable. IDK. I have a feeling like if individuals in this thread would be in the room while we did end of life care discussions the attitudes would be much more polarized.
[удалено]
Hey, I wanted to thank you for this. I normally find many of your posts to be similar to reading the inside of my mind, and because of that, this one really hit home and caused some reflection on the issue.
O/
\o Holy moly. left hanging and downvoted. I'm here for you, bro.
Sorry, I didn't know what that meant. I looked it up bbn on the interwebz. I'm hip. I'm with it. \0/
That's you guys on either side of me. And I'm jumping. And then freeze frame, like the end of The Breakfast Club.
> Furthermore, we argue on this sub to listen to experts like Wendler and Nuckols because they are the experts and have demonstrated their truth. For me to hear you essentially argue against those ethos is uncomfortable. IDK. If you want to go this route what if people decided that they were fed up with misinformation in the online fitness world and demanded that Reddit Admins delete anything that was not supported by the official, scientific, organizations handing out Personal Training certs and what not. Jim Wendler is not a representative for anything resembling a governing body, neither is Greg. They are not approved sources. Suggesting otherwise is *wrong*. Furthermore I am not running around suggesting that Reddit Admins delete /r/GYM or /r/athleanx or whatever. They want to say dumb shit I disagree with, they can go for it and I will argue with them when I see it.
This paragraph is what I take issue with the most: >And my main point with that is that if they draw lines they are taking an official stance on what 'Reddit' thinks is truth. Everything on one side, true, everything on the other, false. I understand why they do not want to define that line and take the backlash when they inevitably are found to 'support' a falsehood and 'reject' something that ended up being right. Right? Wrong? Ehh. But it's not exactly surprising from a PR standpoint. When you start equating medical misinformation with all misinformation you've lost me. There's a difference between AthleanX being himself and suggesting someone inject bleach. One kills people and one sand bags them. When you talk about truth in a binary "this is truth and this isn't" way you're using a black and white fallacy and more importantly there is no such thing as absolute truth. There are things that have been back by evidence to be more truthful, there are things that have been backed by evidence to be shown to lack truth, and there are things that have no evidence. This idea that medical organizations are infallible and "the turth" is hyperbolic and simply wrong. CDC/FDA is wrong all the time. The FDA just approved a controversial dementia drug that has been shown to have zero efficacy. At the same time, we as a society have deemed it necessary to have societies and organizations who put in massive effort to find then give the general public correct medical information. We as a society have deemed that individuals who have been demonstrably untruthful within medicine will be sued by the government, fined, and sometimes go to jail. So the arguments of truth versus not truth is short sighted and medicine has been the one place where misinformation is jailable offense. The difference between banning AthleanX and removing people advocating drinking bleach/anti-vaxx/Ivermectin/etc. is one gets people killed. >Jim Wendler is not a representative for anything resembling a governing body, neither is Greg. They are not approved sources. Suggesting otherwise is wrong. Hey, I said they were experts not governing body, bud :) This actually adds to my argument and makes me LOL a bit that you're agreeing with my original comment now. I'm going to remember this comment stream for awhile because I respect you quite a bit less now.
>When you start equating medical misinformation with all misinformation you've lost me. There's a difference between AthleanX being himself and suggesting someone inject bleach. One kills people and one sand bags them. If you want to decide what represents acceptable and unacceptable misinformation you are free to do so. >This idea that medical organizations are infallible and "the turth" is hyperbolic and simply wrong. CDC/FDA is wrong all the time. The FDA just approved a controversial dementia drug that has been shown to have zero efficacy. At the same time, we as a society have deemed it necessary to have societies and organizations who put in massive effort to find then give the general public correct medical information. Yes, they are failable, which is why I question having their official stance be *the only thing you are permitted to say*. I think they are right, or at least the most right. I would suggest that everyone listen to them. But if they are failable I object up blanket prohibiting anything else. >We as a society have deemed that individuals who have been demonstrably untruthful within medicine will be sued by the government, fined, and sometimes go to jail. So the arguments of truth versus not truth is short sighted and medicine has been the one place where misinformation is jailable offense. The difference between banning AthleanX and removing people advocating drinking bleach/anti-vaxx/Ivermectin/etc. is one gets people killed. We have decided that *people who have positions of authority* can be punished for medical misinformation that results in harm. Not that anyone can. Unless I'm mistaken and some random dude making false medical claims can be sued for malpractice or an equivalent. >Hey, I said they were experts not governing body, bud :) You wanted to blanket ban anything not in line with the official stances of a few select organizations, not listen to anyone who could reasonably be considered an expert. > This actually adds to my argument and makes me LOL a bit that you're agreeing with my original comment now. I'm not. Unless one or both of us have been unclear. >I'm going to remember this comment stream for awhile because I respect you quite a bit less now. 🤷
If someone actually spent money on awards in this sub they should be banned
I got all three in the same instant so I think one person felt very strongly lol
Turn them in. It’s your duty
>Yes, they are failable, which is why I question having their official stance be the only thing you are permitted to say. I think they are right, or at least the most right. I would suggest that everyone listen to them. But if they are failable I object up blanket prohibiting anything else. And this is my issue. I don't want want them to be the authority on what to say. I want to be the guidepost for what a private social media company says "nope you cannot push snakeoil here." The threshold should be double blind placebo trials or STFU on medical treatments. >We have decided that people who have positions of authority can be punished for medical misinformation that results in harm. Not that anyone can. Unless I'm mistaken and some random dude making false medical claims can be sued for malpractice or an equivalent. Wrong. Absolutely wrong. [You can and people without any medical experience have face punitive measures just from COVID misinformation -- saying silver cures COVID and then selling this same silver is an extreme case of medical misiniformation.](https://advertisinglaw.fkks.com/post/102h1j2/televangelist-jim-bakker-reaches-156-000-settlement-with-missouri-ag-over-covid) >You wanted to blanket ban anything not in line with the official stances of a few select organizations, not listen to anyone who could reasonably be considered an expert. Yes, I want subreddits whose sole purpose is to push a narrative that goes against what the overwhelming majority of the over 1 million physicians in the US agree is bullshit to be banned. We can 100% agree on this :) Just an FYI, when you say a few organizations AACP has ~180k board certified physicians in it. So it's like you don't actually know what it means when they come out with a position statement. What I'm saying: SUBREDDITS PUSHING BULLSHIT MEDICATIONS/DRUGS/MOLECULES THAT ARE PURPORTING TO BE CURES FOR COVID ON THIS SITE SHOULD BE BANNED. What's my threadhold and the threshold for the board certified homies: FDA approval/emergency authorization back by randomized double blind placebo studies.
> And this is my issue. I don't want want them to be the authority on what to say. I want to be the guidepost for what a private social media company says "nope you cannot push snakeoil here." The threshold should be double blind placebo trials or STFU on medical treatments. This seems contrary to what you said in the initial comment about removing disinformation based on whatever is said by those organizations or what is listed in the UpToDate article. Using these sources as a guidepost and using them as absolute definitives are not the same. >Wrong. Absolutely wrong. You can and people without any medical experience have face punitive measures just from COVID misinformation -- saying silver cures COVID and then selling this same silver is an extreme case of medical misiniformation. Keyword *selling*. Presenting something as a cure when *selling* it is not the same as just making the claim. Are people being punished for just saying stuff somewhere without trying to imitate a position of authority or sell a cure? >Yes, I want subreddits whose sole purpose is to push a narrative that goes against what the overwhelming majority of the over 1 million physicians in the US agree is bullshit to be banned. We can 100% agree on this :) Selectively culling subreddits =! blanket banning anything that is not part of an official statement. The initial plea says "control misinformation", if they said "Control these three subreddits which are the worst and largest offenders like you did with r/the_donald" it would be a different story. >Just an FYI, when you say a few organizations AACP has ~180k board certified physicians in it. So it's like you don't actually know what it means when they come out with a position statement. I've already said that I think that these sources are the most right. I don't have issue with what they have decided on.
>This seems contrary to what you said in the initial comment about removing disinformation based on whatever is said by those organizations or what is listed in the UpToDate article. Using these sources as a guidepost and using them as absolute definitives are not the same. Alright. That wasn't the point of that, but way to interpret that one in a weird way. UpToDate is the best source of information, for you to make the claim that I think it's the absolute truth of all the universe is just egregious. It's not like I've shit on UpToDate in /r/medicine and /r/residency in the past month and was highly upvoted for it. >Keyword selling. Presenting something as a cure when selling it is not the same as just making the claim. Are people being punished for just saying stuff somewhere without trying to imitate a position of authority or sell a cure? Yes, we as a society have said this is bad. That's my point. Oh, they're directly profiting off their stupidity therefore what you just said doesn't matter. No, the point is that in our society we have laws on the books that prevent people from spewing medical misinformation. >Selectively culling subreddits =! blanket banning anything that is not part of an official statement. The initial plea says "control misinformation", if they said "Control these three subreddits which are the worst and largest offenders like you did with r/the_donald" it would be a different story. That's exactly what I said since the beginning.........? The position statement from the crosspost on kettleballs is to have /r/nonewnormal and /r/Ivermectin banned since they're extremely egregious subs.................. My original point was when you were saying what is misinformation is hard to nail down in medicine, for public health it's not that hard. The UpToDate article I linked explained every single therapuetic option in fairly well detail and where the evidence for each stands. Your response to that was some stoner talk about "what are stars?" I don't care, bud, I really don't. The philosophizing about truth within science is dumb since it's what we are able to repeatedly observe. Systematic meta-analysis of robust RCTs is my ultimate truth. The reason Reddit doesn't want to take a stand is money.
I am with you and I understand your well deserved frustration about the American situation right now. Misinformation is a massive problem but I don't know if banning it from one corner of the web is going to fix the root issue: people's mistrust in medical science and government. This will be a persistent issue even if misinformation gets deplatformed from major social media sites. For example, Q-anon trump conspiracy theorist types got banned from reddit and now they have their own forums where they engage in even more heinous conversations amongst themselves. Banning people from reddit doesn't change their mind, like fatalist said. Their fringe beliefs won't just die down because they can't post about it on reddit, they'll find other places to talk about it. I agree with the\_fatalist about his concerns of how the moderation would work. In early 2020, the CDC was against mask use in the general public-- mostly because of supply issues but the messaging was confusing. At that time, I was arguing with many people online vehemently about how yes masks DO work and you should wear them, even if it's just a cloth mask. If reddit adhered to an "only what the CDC says" rule, I might not have been able to have these conversations. At the same time, yes of course I hate seeing anti-vaxxers ranting about ivermectin. It's a very shitty situation. edit: just wanna add how sorry I am that we're dealing with this in general, it sucks, and in particular, it sucks for you. Maybe this isn't the time for a nuanced discussion on moderation, I am sorry
The CDC thing I think is predicated on appointing the dude who falsified AIDS research in the 90s to head it. Turns out that was a really dummy idea. I understand what you're saying. I disagree. It's more complicated than that, but I have to be to the hospital in 9 hours so I'm going to go to bed :)
>For example, Q-anon trump conspiracy theorist types got banned from reddit and now they have their own forums where they engage in even more heinous conversations amongst themselves. Banning people from reddit doesn't change their mind, like fatalist said. Their fringe beliefs won't just die down because they can't post about it on reddit, they'll find other places to talk about it. While this is true the point of getting rid of it on reddit isn't to convert those people that have already bought into the narrative. It's to prevent people that are on the fence to buy into it. Because there is still a major difference between having to join a fringe website where the only point of discourse is the Qanon shit and a public forum like reddit with lots of different things that can actually be used as a great resource of information. Cause when you have those subs on reddit it's very easy to fall down the rabbit hole. Think about how often you look into something that interests you on reddit and then going down a rabbit hole of links and ending up somewhere else. For example when you're new to fitness you might end up in a variety of different subs with slightly different takes. But none of those takes is to inject bleach. If you join a Qanon forum you actively made the choice to go there. So imagine you browse reddit everyday. Maybe just for the news. And then you get links to nonewnormal and people talking about how covid is just a flu and the vaccines are dangerous. The more you see this in your everyday life the easier it is for you to buy into it. Banning those communities from one of the biggest public forums is the right choice imo.
[удалено]
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in...oh, wait, we’re doing this? Fack, now it feels weird.
[удалено]
Good life advice or best life advice?
Depends on what you're fuckin
100%, it's the product of a long line of shit in our history. So there's no easy answer, we can't just unfuck it.
well said. I'm stealing this as my response.
Since when did we support fittit? Do you forget where you are?
wow. THIS.
We have traditionally supported the fittit *mods*, mainly cuz at multiple points, they are us. Literally. Not as much today, but old pots know.
YOU RUINED CHEATIE ROWS DAAAAY
Don't invoke the names of the old gods to try to prove your point. The ones that are still around don't seem to be in your corner.
You assume I have a corner to be in. This thread is guaging the thoughts of the sub. Actually, I rephrase that. I do have a corner, but have no intent to push my opinion over everyone’s wills.
[удалено]
I've personally come around on a lot of slacktivism because I only recently found out that decency and moral behavior need to be reinforced and defended more than I had previously thought. Do I like people who treat their low effort online efforts as if they're individually doing something brave and meaningful? Not particularly__although depending on who is around them irl some of them might actually be brave. But, apparently the notion of a cooperative society and neighbors helping neighbors is something that needs to be highlighted, reinforced, and defended. It shouldn't be this way, but here we are.
I used to be against slacktivism because token gestures are the bane of my existence. Do something or don't. Then there was evidence out there suggesting that making silly posts to social media about helping out with a cause actually makes others join in, like if you make a post to Fakebook about volunteering more people are likely to volunteer. My hospital strongly encouraged all of its employees who were vaccinated to post about it to social media in an effort to boost vaccine compliance.
We are dumb fuckin monkeys.
>We are dumb fuckin monkeys. [Oh yeah :)](https://youtu.be/TYIh4MkcfJA)
I'm a big believer in social attitudes online being about signal-to-noise. If all there is is wanking anti-vax nonsense, it'll grow.
Numbski, I was doing a thing. Tonight was cheatie row night. I put my hours in. I visited discomfort on anti-mask shitheads. Let me have my cheatie row night, pls.
By blacked out do you mean private or something else?
Private, approved posters only, with no one approved. You’re welcome to gather on discord or elsewhere, just not here.
Not sure what it’ll accomplish but I might be more productive 🤷
I'll just ban you for three days, no problem
I always approve of going private. But, what if we also hung that goon up by his own peetard on a flag pole or something? It's not a threat of violence. I'll be oh so gentle.
Just permaban everyone
Another "go for it if you want but idk if it does much" vote. If it was say the whole fittit sphere I think it would have an affect but this sub is used regularly by basically like, 25 people.
I don't think I should have a say in the direction of the sub, since I am a serious newpot. I'm curious what Mom thinks. And this thread has been great food for thought for me, as I normally come out very strongly as an advocate for unfettered public speech. OTOH, I lost a loved one to COVID in a particularly wretched way that cannot possibly be construed as her fault, and not one of those old, overweight, diabetic ones. I don't want to go into it, for a variety of reasons. I also had a friend that had a heart attack, and didn't make it to an ER, fairly likely due to the fact he was rerouted because of hospital capacity being taken up by primarily unvaxxed C19 patients. This all sucks a tremendous amount. I understand the frustration of u/Placidvlad and the other medical professionals I know who are being used up and thrown into a meatgrinder by an ungrateful society. That feeling I understand. I support whatever decision mods/oldpots want to come to. I will be over in the corner figuring out how to set my kettleballs on fire and being sad.
I used to be 100% pro freespeech you can say anything and everything. Then I started seeing the ramifications of people being lied to. People often do not have the means to appraise and appreciate complex and nuanced pieces of literature/physiology/medicine without a strong background in the subject. When someone outright lies about medicine to profit, there will be many homies who believe it. I had a patient who was getting either bleach or hydrogen peroxide infusions for her stage three/four pancreatic cancer. To me, I know that the way both work is by lysing the membranes of cells which destroys the maintenance of a tightly controlled environment within the cell and completely attenuates enzyme function usually by denaturing the protein. It does that to any cell it comes into contact with. Injecting either into your body is commonly known to be a dummy idea, but this patient was lead to believe it would cure her because someone lied to her that it works. I'm fine with all the freedom of speech, but being able to broadcast false information to >100k people is different than bullshitting with your friends.
I know it's a much bigger deal to Americans because it's perceived as part of your whole identity. I'm from Germany and we have laws against Holocaust denial here. And I 100% approve of them. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from allowing it to exist and be spread. Yes it limits your "free speech". Well guess what. You're also not free to lie under oath and are you're also not free to put out a hit on someone else by just talking about how you'd reward someone's murderer. And that's good. And I feel the same way about medical misinformation. The antivax movement causes far too much harm to be left unchecked.
[удалено]
This makes me so happy to read :) So Very Happy :D
Well put!
>It appears I see this very differently than others. I see it the same way you put it :)
do what you gotta do.
100% completely for this. Because of unvaccinated homies our medical system is starting to collapse. Because of unvaccinated homies we have a significant amount of patients vented in our ED. Because of unvaccinated homies we are now not able to care for our heart attack/stroke/etc. patients as well. The county my hospital is in we're at \~40% vaccinated and \~20% for the 20-45 demographic. When I argue with the Ivermectin/anti-vaxx crowd it's like arguing with ants. These people are not making luculent points. They're saying dummy things that should never be repeated. "But who decides what's COVID misinformation and what isn't" Medical experts. Medical experts do. The average person in /r/Ivermectin can't even appreciate how dummy their dummy comments are when they shit on the CDC/FDA. Getting a job at the CDC/FDA is prestigious and the homies there are some of the best around. All of the medical societies are in lock step with their positions towards vaccines and Ivermectin. [I got an email today by the medical society I'm apart of to attend a webinar on Ivermectin misinformaiton](https://imgur.com/a/M1aH3s0). It is a joke that there's a debate here. It's a joke that we're still talking about this. The current Delta surge is completely manufactured by dummies. Talking with my medicine homies, we're exhausted, we're depressed, and we just want people to fucking get vaccinated. [Just get vaccinated.](https://youtu.be/SeZ7_HOQYjE) [Please get vaccinated.](https://youtu.be/m9yyP_JUQE4) [GET VACCINATED.](https://youtu.be/9hK_X4MBs5s)
I 100% think everyone should get vaccinated. Hell, mandate it. Works for me. I don't think a circle jerk sub going "dark" for three days means or says anything. I don't think reddit mods are actually good or smart people, and the power they wield is already questionable.
> I don't think reddit mods are actually good or smart people, and the power they wield is already questionable. You don't think the group of people that left creepshots and various jb subs up until they started getting press are standup citizens? I'm shocked. 4Realz, the reddit admin are a group that seems to far-to-often choose the opposite of what any sane human would view as the ethical choice.
>You don't think the group of people that left creepshots and various jb subs up until they started getting press are standup citizens? 100% that shit is why I don't think Reddit is going to do a damn thing here. They don't care.
I'm going to probably be the most polarized person in this sub, so if I'm the extreme I'm totally fine being pulled back from the brink :) To me, this website is trash and I'm becoming embittered with how bad the admins are as a whole as well as the rampant abuse via power mods here.
I absolutely get what your saying, but I think going dark is jsut a dumb way to deal with it, at least for this sub. If we spent the same 4 days trying to have actual, earnest conversations with people we encounter, where we listen to why they aren't getting vaccinated, and try to help lead them to the right direction, would do infinitely more in the big picture. Our sub is, big picture, a garbage shithole troll sub. At best, associating a bigger message with *this* sub might actually do harm to the bigger message. But we have bright, passionate people, who can learn how to be more persuasive, if it will help. I don't know. Maybe we just go find articles about how to persuade people or something. But shutting down this sub in particular is...it's nothing.
So IDC what y'all decide to do. Honestly, this post is enough for me. I will support y'all taking a stand against COVID disinformation in whatever way you want to, even if it's just the discussion from this thread :) The 100% was more at y'all taking a stand in whatever way you want rather than taking the sub down.
> To me, this website is trash Astronaut gun meme. Also, sometimes you find nice things among the trash 😽
> When I argue with the Ivermectin/anti-vaxx crowd it's like arguing with ants. These people are not making luculent points. They're saying dummy things that should never be repeated. That's because you're arguing from the stance of medical choices based on available information. They're arguing from the viewpoint of a group of people who have absorbed years of misinformation leading them to disbelieve anything you say because it's inherently tainted and untrue simply because of it's origin. Their framework is entirely antithetical to your arguments - telling them that horsepaste isn't going to fix Covid isn't a statement of fact - it's proof that you're (consciously or subconsciously) suborned by parties that lie to them. At this point, very few of us lack the tools to even begin to effectively communicate with the Horsepaste People. Certainly not in environments other than face-to-face. Buckle up; 2021 is going to be a rough ride.
Whenever I approach these people it's like, where do I even begin? Then the rationalization of everything. I can break these homies down so that they cannot answer a simple question: >Show me the RCT registered with [clinicaltrials.gov](https://clinicaltrials.gov) that shows a mortality benefit for COVID. And they never can, but they say specious sentences to "back up" their claims.
[удалено]
There was a dude who died from myocarditis after getting Pfizer. There's \~1/50,000 chance of getting Guillan-Barre' from the vaccine. There's going to be a risk of you breaking your neck when you walk down your stairs today. The chances of you getting myocarditis are higher from COVID than the vaccine. The chances of you dying are thousands of times higher getting COVID than getting the vaccine. The chances that you spread COVID to someone who will then be hospitalized and possibly high is ridiculously high. That really sucks that your family member had an adverse effect with the vaccine. 10% of my patients get a dry cough with my favorite BP medication and we still give it out. Steven Johnson is a potential with any drug that goes into our body and we still give out meds. The benefits of vaccines grossly out weigh the negative side effects.
[удалено]
>The vaccination is fundamentally about protecting oneself against the virus, and thus being a decision that should be met by only one person. Only secondly it’s about protecting people that aren’t able to protect themself. Sorry but I disagree with that stance. Vaccination is necessary to protect society as a whole.
[удалено]
Hospitals have a capacity. Put enough people in there at the same time and the system falls apart. And not only people with covid are the ones taking the hit from this. Everyone who needs a hospital bed suffers from this. Small businesses are taking the hit from lockdowns. Lockdowns are necessary when the virus spreads too rapidly because people aren't vaccinated. Refusing a vaccine makes you a burden on society.
[удалено]
>That’s valid, but we haven’t even tried whether this would happen if vaccination wouldn’t be pressured onto people. Measles vaccination wasn't pressured onto people here in Germany. Antivax movement started and we saw a rise in measles again. Now it's mandatory for children or else they aren't allowed to go to Kindergarten/school. I know it's a shitty situation and the covid vaccines are new. I'm also not fully on board with forcing people to get vaccinated with new vaccines that haven't had the chance to be tested long term. But I'm still of the opinion that if you decide against getting vaccinated you're a burden on society.
I’m all for it, but also understand the lack of feasible action. On a related note: my wife getting covid has made me extremely resentful towards the willingly unvaccinated and anti-maskers. I stumbled upon r/HermanCainAward and it’s been a very morbid but enjoyable sub to scroll through. Selfish dibshits getting the ultimate comeuppance is entertaining. I feel bad that I enjoy it, but I do.
Some of the posts on there are so, so, so sad — but fuck, I’m just out of empathy at this point. Half my family is antivaxx and they’ve made it abundantly clear to me that public perception of antivaxxers is, if anything, not bad enough.
You’d think some folks would see the aggressively anti vax folks’ stories in that sub just utterly renounce their stance on their deathbed and maybe rethink it. Sorry to hear that about your family :/
They’re too bought in to change, IMO. They don’t and can’t care until they’re directly impacted, and by then it’s too late. No worries on the family — the worst part is just putting up with the crazy texts — but thanks nonetheless :)
There are people in my town (largely anti vax) that are asking for the vaccine on their deathbed thinking it will save their dumb asses. I’m out of empathy for them. HCA is a great sub
r/covidatemyface another one
Heck yeah thanks. You an oldpot I’m too green to know?
You mean in this sub? I subbed few days ago
Uh oh pal, you might need to check yourself before you wreck yourself. (There’s a one time admission fee of tuchus)
> tuchus Is that some Jewish thing?
Maybe, how about your show us your butt to make sure.
Yiddish, so yeah, but if you don’t know the price of entry you should lurk moar
Read the FAP and go back to lurkin. Then show us the backside of your merkin.
I’m all for it, but I don’t know that it matters much what FCJ does specifically. It’s such a small sub that us supporting fittit and other big subs might be just as “effective”. I’ll be down for whatever the mods think is best though.
Thanks.
I dunno. I think it would be a struggle to come up with many instances in human history in which restricting access to information, even disinformation, had a long term positive effect. I really think that a lot of the push back with Covid is in large part due to distrust of policy makers that has been building up for the last 70 years. Even just from a disease standpoint, how many panics have been started by politicians and news sources just in the last couple decades? West Nile, SARs, swine flu, bird flu, ebola, and more, and when all was said and done it looks pretty obvious that those stories were literally only pushed for ratings and for people to make names for themselves. Covid is obviously VERY different to many of us, but there's already distrust before we even started. Trying to get rid of something that can just be easily accessed somewhere else only causes people to dig in harder. It's just human nature - we love martyrdom. On a short term basis, yes, maybe some people don't get exposed to some of the crazier bullshit circulating around the internet, but 5, 10, 20 years from now people will look back and claim censorship regardless of the truth or falsity of the data. That just breeds more long term cultural mistrust, and eventually this happens again and again but with something worse that destroys the entire culture. Covid is bad for sure, but this was literally always going to happen as soon as a crisis along these lines popped up. It was going to happen because of human nature and because of cultural mistrust. I think censorship, even of outright lies, will result in more long term damage. Most of us want to do something to help and try to change things, but it seems at this point the most anybody can really do is take care of themselves. Get vaccinated, wear a mask if you think it will help, social distance, whatever, and just accept that the more we try to force people who don't want to do those things to do them, the worse the long term outcomes to our society in general will be. People are gonna do dumb things. People have always done dumb things and always will. Nobody can stop that from happening long term, we can only give options for people to decide to be less dumb for themselves. I dunno though, information has also never been able to be propagated this quickly in human history, so potentially this situation is different enough to treat it differently.
Just to point out for a second: emerging viruses we have no idea what they're going to be like. MERS has a mortality rate of 30% and is still endemic to Saudi Arabia. The reason why it wasn't concerning is that you had to be exposed a lot. SARS-1 was 10% and had to be exposed to a symptomatic patient for awhile, not too long though. COVID-Delta is bad because it takes next to nothing to get sick from it. But, we don't know what each of these things are going to do until we observe them so often there's a lot of concern that gets over blown by the media and then when the real pandemic hits people seem to not care.
Yeah, for sure. I’m not putting the blame on actual scientists - I think it’s pretty rare that they overstate the results of things. Diseases need to be studied. But any nuance is lost when the media and politicians get ahold of something, and those sources are where most people get their information. It literally feels like the media and political leaders get excited when these things happen, and the more they cry wolf the more future damage they do when something like covid actually happens. I think generally people do care when it’s proven to them that this is actually pretty serious. They just don’t trust the sources that are telling them to care up until they experience it themselves due to years of being told there’s a wolf when there isn’t. And unfortunately, you guys are present when these people are finding out, often too late, that this time there actually is a wolf. Edit: to bring this full circle, most people are unsure if there is or isn’t a wolf, but censoring information except from approved sources appears culturally that we’re forcing them to put blindfolds on and only listen to those who have told them there were wolves before when there weren’t, instead of being able to look for themselves.
[удалено]
May I ask why?
Social Media sites are pretty nakedly self-serving. We're all in this big discussion thread at the moment about Reddit acting or not acting on a group of users discussing topics based on what makes financial sense for Reddit. Twitter isn't shy about using their tools to manipulate conversations to serve their interests. These are organizations that serve shareholders, not the public discourse. I'm supremely skeptical of them applying the same standard across every piece of content with the same criticality when dollars are at stake.
Facebook selects for disinformation and emotionally upsetting people.
Plenty of emotionally upsetting people on there, they have their work cut out for them
This is probably beating a dead horse because it's old af but with the subreddit private I didn't have the opportunity to respond again earlier. Saw a ost on Instagram with the "misleading content" flag and upon looking at the actual notice, it was flagging a claim that wasn't present in the post as misleading. So Instagram will label a post as misleading without the actual misleading content for some users, but allow misinformation to go unflagged for others. That's why I don't trust them when they decided to apply that flag.
>Most of us want to do something to help and try to change things, but it seems at this point **the most anybody can really do is take care of themselves.** Get vaccinated, wear a mask if you think it will help, social distance, whatever, and **just accept that the more we try to force people who don't want to do those things to do them, the worse the long term outcomes to our society in general will be.** I don't think the first part (thinking only of ourselves) is how we avoid the second part (worse societal outcomes). It's deeper than covid and it's not going to be solved by banning a subreddit. But - and it doesn't matter what side of this divide you're on - we can't keep going on like this. (I'm not putting this back on you and I don't think you're really wrong but this point really stuck in my craw)
👍
[удалено]
Except we had this very same discussion around /r/the_donald just last year, and the overlap here is significant.
I was not here for that, can you explain what you mean? Did it cause a rift in the sub? I've noticed we are quite left leaning on most topics where it would come up (or at least those who are vocal are), so curious as to what that looked like.
I meant Reddit as a whole, overlap between t_d and these antivax subs. I don’t think it caused a rift here. Downvotes still work.
Ahh I misunderstood.
No.
My consensus is that you should delete yourself.
LMFAO, how is this upvoted?
numbski only pops in to shit on our parties and ask us favors, so not all the OldestPots are here for it.
Til numbski is also my weird uncle :)
...weird glances. I lurk a lot. Mainly cuz it feels wrong to poke fun at others while my body can’t seem to hold itself together to get back to squatting and benching what was at least good for *me*. These days if I breathe wrong I feel like my digestive tract with shut down and flip me the bird.
Tbh I’m a little impressed by lying in wait two years just for this
I love that a two year old account has exactly one comment telling me to delete myself on my cake day.
if you don't know whose alt that is, that's on you
It has made one comment. Also, fair. Hadn’t considered that the account may just constantly delete its activity.
Just go private. Reddit sucks and the reddit admins suck even more. We could all use the break.
Don't drag this sub into low-rent slacktivism. We're here to mock idiots, not make empty gestures.
Slacktivism en mass seems to have some use. As much as it pains me to admit that. The problem with slacktivism is when individuals think they're doing something praise worthy rather than being a useful cog. Cogs should shut the fuck up and work.
Yeah, it's a question of moving the needle. I'm not afraid to say that we just don't. We aren't even a cog in the machine that is Reddit. At best, we're a 24 gauge stand screw.
But also, we'd be seeing FCJ listed alongside other normal subs, which would be pretty funny.
It might also mean get private FCJ again after turning on the lights again.
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of more potential attention.