Enabling ‘wellness’ nonsense…

“…. it has become increasingly difficult to separate sensible health advice from what should be consider, well, insane…”

Well this is what I’ve been saying for a coupla years now. This is my mantra. Its not just ‘health advice’. Its politics. Its everything. Its ‘increasingly difficult‘ to know what is accurate and what is not.

w
v

nittany ram wrote:

wv wrote:

“…. it has become increasingly difficult to separate sensible health advice from what should be consider, well, insane…”

Well this is what I’ve been saying for a coupla years now. This is my mantra. Its not just ‘health advice’. Its politics. Its everything. Its ‘increasingly difficult‘ to know what is accurate and what is not.

w
v

I don’t think this is fixable either. Anyone at anytime can publish anything they want on the internet. It’s not hard to dress up any piece of nonsense and make it look legitimate to untrained eyes.

And the media certainly isn’t vetting much in their eagerness to fill a 24 hour news cycle. I know a lot of questionable studies that never would have seen the light of day in the past are now being paraded in front of the public as if they represent consensus. They’ll publish anything they think will generate clicks.

===================

I agree with that, but the problem has many facets. I just think a corporotacracy is by nature kinda ‘anti-truth’. Not always of course, but in general. Profit over truth.

I mean everytime i hear about a ‘scientific study’ now i have to ask who sponsored it, etc. How do i know which corporation influenced it, funded it, etc. And so forth. I wish there was just ‘science’ but there’s not. There’s ‘science spawned in a corporate setting’. Which is different.

w
v