Make America Healthy Again is a joke.

[Gennadiy1981]

I am reading your comments and people you have lost your minds. Are you serious? Did anyone even bother to read what this photo was supposed to be for? All of you look like zombies here. This photo was made to demonstrate a point and Al of you took it as a fact. Wake up all of you, you are going into deep slumber. What is wrong with all of you? You seem like you’re hypnotized. I wonder did anyone even bothered to read why this photo was even taken and what point was try to bring across? 

[Jodistrict]

6 hours ago, zurew said:

That sounds good on paper, but I am not sure if there is a specific plan how to do it and I am not sure if RFK jr and Trump even has a clear concept what "uncompromised evidence-based research" even means. How do RFK jr knows what good evidence even is or what amount of evidence should be generated for a given drug?

Just on its face, without  me digging into it, I can see issues with the clearing up of the conflict of interest - where clearing up can entail cutting off big sponsors and suddenly you lose a big chunk of money that was avalaible in the past for research and for testing drugs. 

I am also not sure what substance can RFK jr who has a bunch of false beliefs about medical stuff can contribute to the 'how' with respect to  the reversing the trends of the chronic disease epidemic.

RFK was a successful trial lawyer for several decades.  He knows how to evaluate evidence.   He has been thinking about this issue for a long time and has a plan.  He also has a habit of backing up his "beliefs" with multiple references to scientific literature.   He is the best qualified person to make real change.     

[Joshe]

32 minutes ago, Gennadiy1981 said:

I am reading your comments and people you have lost your minds. Are you serious? Did anyone even bother to read what this photo was supposed to be for? All of you look like zombies here. This photo was made to demonstrate a point and Al of you took it as a fact. Wake up all of you, you are going into deep slumber. What is wrong with all of you? You seem like you’re hypnotized. I wonder did anyone even bothered to read why this photo was even taken and what point was try to bring across? 

Enlighten us 

[Leo Gura]

47 minutes ago, Jodistrict said:

He also has a habit of backing up his "beliefs" with multiple references to scientific literature. 

The opposite is the case. He makes wild, unhinged, ridiculius, scientifically false claims all the time.

[zurew]

1 hour ago, Jodistrict said:

RFK was a successful trial lawyer for several decades.  He knows how to evaluate evidence.   He has been thinking about this issue for a long time and has a plan.  He also has a habit of backing up his "beliefs" with multiple references to scientific literature.   He is the best qualified person to make real change.     

The fact that you started with "rfk is a lawyer he knows how to evaluate evidence" tells me everything I need to know about your fallacious reasoning . Being a lawyer has literally nothing to do with gaining the necessary skills to evaluate evidence for health related stuff or to make a prescription what people need to do to become healthy or to make presriptions how to eradicate a given illness. Do you think If I am a successful lawyer that its entailed that I am a successful doctor as well and a successful researcher as well and suddenly I am qualified to prescribe what you should  eat, what medicine you should take ?

You can put beliefs in ""- but I checked out multiple  claims that he made and some of them were so wrong that you could debunk them with 5 seconds of research. Some of the links that he cites doesn't conclude what he concludes from them or they are not nowhere near as strongly backed up as he think  and he ignores all evidence and meta-analysis that goes against his narrative. The guy has 0 clue wtf he is talking about when it comes to vaccines, covid and health.

No, he is  certainly not the best qualified person to make a change. 

Edited Tuesday at 06:42 AM by zurew

[Jodistrict]

59 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The opposite is the case. He makes wild, unhinged, ridiculius, scientifically false claims all the time.

"Kennedy holds a number of controversial views when it comes to public health, including anti-vaccine activism. However, experts generally agree that his stances on food and nutrition are commendable."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/rfk-jrs-no-1-hurdle-take-unhealthy-food-money-rcna180365?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1JzZ3E2g9eLltHon_NVkNXXtY6m_S4QonmLozwrIHilbSpobYdiTbbbuE_aem_tPmIVs0IM8Cb_b8Wp5s_vw

[Salvijus]

2 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

experts generally agree that his stances on food and nutrition are commendable

"all those experts are retarded also, he he he, check mate " 

[zazen]

Thats the thing with experts - they can back different opinions because money can back different opinions. My first experience of disillusionment with the health care system was in my teens when countless doctors told me food doesn't affect acne and just prescribed me antibiotics. I even told them the contrary after doing my own research and they wouldn't say much. I had to learn myself through the internet and books and resolved it via diet and lifestyle. I tested that when I had wheat / sugar / milk / fried foods (seed oils that RFK rallies against) I would break out, feel sluggish and have brain fog the following days.

Doctors aren't educated in holistic health or nutrition, they aren't taught prevention - just prescription from a pharma funded education system. Diagnose the issue - prescribe the drug. Drugs and medicine is needed to save lives, but not to make us thrive - its a last resort when we get very ill. The goal isn't simply to increase life span (which medicine has done) but health span - living long and healthily.

During Covid and lockdown I remember listening too all kinds of doctors and following them on Youtube and Twitter - I saw first hand one by one they would have their profiles erased and deleted. Surely its un-scientific to not have open debate? Then came the Barrington declaration signed by thousands of ''experts'' agains the Covid response. The fact that vaccine manufacturers have immunity is also concerning. Regardless - it was a confusing time for many which eroded trust in institutions as the situation was weaponised and shady contracts and interests existed.

Places that didn't lock down and recommended Vitamin D didn't have such terrible results like Sweden where I have relatives. Health knowledge is so lacking Western governments couldn't even simply advise their populations to take vitamin D / C or some basics to boost immunity. Whitney Webb says it seems as though it was a fiscal policy to crush demand and the economy by shutting down mom and pop shops or small-medium business whilst allowing big retailers to remain open (Walmart, Amazon warehouses etc) and for hedgefunds like Black rock etc to sweep in and buy distressed assets. Make that make sense! 

This is why the right generally don't trust institutions enough, whilst the left generally trust them too much. Think about what we've gone through the last 20 years - lies regarding wars in early 2000's (and currently diplomatic cover for Israel), lies regarding financial collapse of 2008 and bank bailouts, social media prominence from 2010's providing alternative sources of information to speed run all this exposure to the lies, big tech collusion with elections and 2020 Covid, and now election lies about who would win. And in the UK labour government who promised so much and completely went back on their promises the minute they got in. People are literally getting imprisoned for social media posts (which weren't incitement of hate crimes even) whilst criminals run around in the streets - and then we think we are a democracy and point fingers to dictators in the global south. gtfo. 

The left are so oblivious to their own power and institutional backing. Their projections are confessions about the other side. That they cancel, de-platform, lawfare against their political rivals, take what is said out of context in a media machine churning out propoganda, that people concerned for borders are racists (although some are) but its simply common sense that a country needs borders that are secure. Common sense is framed as facist - whether done so in hyperbole or not, the intended affect is common sense is perceived as such. Normal people wishing to live normal lives are gas lit about their own views and instincts of survival. They're told their lying about their own very real tangible conditions.

As an example from where I am in London, theres a major road called Park Lane in a central area (like fifth avenue in New York) and there has been encampments there for months with tents. The authorities did nothing as it got larger and larger until now when they have finally been cleared. The rents and business get affected by this, which is supposed to be the tourist hub of the city that a string of many employees rely on. This is akin to Californian cities not taking the safety and cleanliness of their streets seriously - and why people feel their needs to be less bureaucracy or a streamlined one which allows for faster decision making and action to occur.

In Dubai for example a new road or bridge needs to be built to alleviate traffic pressures - it'll be done in 6 months, in the West it'll take 6 years. Criminals needing swift prosecution - done. In the West - the contradiction of human rights and moral ambiguity paralysis's us with the possible fear of being deemed racist or a dictator for caring about the rights of every day people. Where are their rights to safety, decency? Listen to Bukele of Salvador speak on this - he was gas lit by the West and NGO's for going too hard after the cartels and criminals - but El Salvador has gone from the most dangerous place to one of the safest in short order.

So every domain - financial, media, health, politics, foreign policy - we are lied to by the establishment. And people wonder why people are opting for populist leaders - because they would rather bet on change than a status quo they distrust and has failed. It's not as reductive as identity politics ie people not voting for a woman or person of colour.

Edited Tuesday at 10:09 AM by zazen

[zazen]

I think Trumpers put too much faith in Trump - but one thing Bret below says which is what seems to be a driving factor in the shift right and the general rise of populism is this - ''Radical change is very dangerous, anyone who likes the idea of radical change for its own sake is an insane person. I support the idea of radical change because I think our predicament is serious enough that nothing short of radical change can save us.''

After decade of institutions nuking their credibility, with the remains of it dying in the rubble of Gaza - and a general sense of disillusionment, lack of belonging, and lack of optimism for the future as the social contract of a better life for the next generation isn't panning out as is seen in essentials being inflated out of reach for most people (healthcare, housing, education) - people feel nothing short of radical change needs to occur.

Someone who's been a Democrat his whole life commenting on how the parties have inverted and how both parties have changed (first few min).

 

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Salvijus said:

"all those experts are retarded also, he he he, check mate " 

Yeah no shit   - they agree with him that processed food is generally worse. All of this is comaptible with the studies (which is not the case when it comes to his other takes - where we conveniently ditch all studies and consensus - for example on seed oils)

 

Since we are so smart and since the institutions lie all the time and since there is a conflict of interest - we should go by our genius ,infallible heruistic of - if the consensus of experts say x is true - then x must be false.

If they say that processed food is bad, we should assume that processed of is actually  good. The reason why they it is good is because the studies around processed food were funded by them - so we can ditch all of them without engaging with the substance. And the second reason why processed food is good is because they lied to us in the past about other things and because they were wrong about other things, so we can infer that they are wrong about this as well - and  we shouldn't even bother to stop and think. The exact same logic goes for vaccines, for the evaluation of covid 19 and for any other item or drug.

The other infallible and genius heruistic is to check what Rfk jr claims and just based on the fact that RFK jr says that something is true - we can for sure know without a doubt that it is true. The exact same goes for any alternative media claim. We dont need to spend time cheking out the evidence or the validity of any accusation or engage with any specific thing  - we can confidently dismiss write off all institutions and all experts.

That is  @zazen and @Salvijus level reasoning up there.

I am curious, when the 'RFK jr is always right' heruistic generates something that is mututally exclusive with the 'experts always lie' heruistic - which one do you guys end up going with?

Edited Tuesday at 10:27 AM by zurew

[zurew]

1 hour ago, zazen said:

Health knowledge is so lacking Western governments couldn't even simply advise their populations to take vitamin D / C or some basics to boost immunity.

Wait are we suddenly trusting studies around vitamin pills?

 I thought all the studies around them were compromised and funded by the corrupt government. I thought we can and we should ditch categorically everything that comes from the establishment (since you know they lied to us in the past, why would we trust them about the pills ,bro ).

[Salvijus]

2 hours ago, zurew said:

Yeah no shit   - they agree with him that processed food is generally worse. All of this is comaptible with the studies (which is not the case when it comes to his other takes - where we conveniently ditch all studies and consensus - for example on seed oils)

 

Since we are so smart and since the institutions lie all the time and since there is a conflict of interest - we should go by our genius ,infallible heruistic of - if the consensus of experts say x is true - then x must be false.

If they say that processed food is bad, we should assume that processed of is actually  good. The reason why they it is good is because the studies around processed food were funded by them - so we can ditch all of them without engaging with the substance. And the second reason why processed food is good is because they lied to us in the past about other things and because they were wrong about other things, so we can infer that they are wrong about this as well - and  we shouldn't even bother to stop and think. The exact same logic goes for vaccines, for the evaluation of covid 19 and for any other item or drug.

The other infallible and genius heruistic is to check what Rfk jr claims and just based on the fact that RFK jr says that something is true - we can for sure know without a doubt that it is true. The exact same goes for any alternative media claim. We dont need to spend time cheking out the evidence or the validity of any accusation or engage with any specific thing  - we can confidently dismiss write off all institutions and all experts.

That is  @zazen and @Salvijus level reasoning up there.

I am curious, when the 'RFK jr is always right' heruistic generates something that is mututally exclusive with the 'experts always lie' heruistic - which one do you guys end up going with?

I go with the flow 🏄 

Edited Tuesday at 11:30 AM by Salvijus

[Recursoinominado]

5 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

"Kennedy holds a number of controversial views when it comes to public health, including anti-vaccine activism. However, experts generally agree that his stances on food and nutrition are commendable."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/rfk-jrs-no-1-hurdle-take-unhealthy-food-money-rcna180365?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1JzZ3E2g9eLltHon_NVkNXXtY6m_S4QonmLozwrIHilbSpobYdiTbbbuE_aem_tPmIVs0IM8Cb_b8Wp5s_vw

This channel is awesome, full of videos debunking scammers like RFK jr.

[Salvijus]

2 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

This channel is awesome, full of videos debunking scammers like RFK jr.

The thing is, even the highest level experts and scientists have differences in opinion on different subjects. How can you possibly know who's right when you're yourself not a scientists or an expert in those fields? And even if you were an expert, your opinion would still not have more weight than any other opinion from other experts that disagree with you. 

Edited Tuesday at 02:11 PM by Salvijus

[zazen]

@zurew

I'm not calling for rejection of institutions or experts outright. Just pointing to a broader phenomenon - the erosion of trust in institutions and why so many people feel disillusioned.  Some of the breaches of trust aren't just trivial missteps - they’re big enough to have shaped how people view authority. You can’t blame people for being skeptical when the institutions asking for their trust have repeatedly acted against the public’s interests.

I said in the post ''the right generally don't trust institutions enough, whilst the left generally trust them too much''. I'm aware that alternative non establishment media can be flawed including RFK. People are simply navigating a broken system where trust is fractured, and they’re piecing together what they can from the information available wherever they can get it. Sometimes that means questioning the institutional narrative - it’s not about blind faith in anyone.

Social media isn't perfect but its revealed how manipulative mainstream media can be. For example when we see full clips of speeches that contradict the edited soundbites used to smear someone. If the institutions lying to us are the same ones gatekeeping information, of course people are going to look elsewhere - and once they find that alternative media is flawed too, they will be a bit disillusioned on who to trust and how to trust. This stress makes people fall into camps to avoid nuance - like either trust institutions or don't trust them.

The rise of populism isn’t just blind rage - it’s a response to a system that has failed to serve ordinary people. People are desperate enough for change that they’re willing to take risks on populist leaders because the status quo has proven itself untrustworthy. The institutions demanding peoples trust haven’t earned it - or previously had but have betrayed it with a thousand cuts.  Skepticism is a natural response and trust needs to be re-built - but it won't be if everyone skeptical gets shut down as a conspiracist.

 

[Recursoinominado]

58 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

The thing is, even the highest level experts and scientists have differences in opinion on different subjects. How can you possibly know who's right when you're yourself not a scientists or an expert in those fields? And even if you were an expert, your opinion would still not have more weight than any other opinion from other experts that disagree with you. 

Serious high-level science experts, in the same field, will agree on most things. 

Science isn't about feelings or "opinions" but what solid serious studies show/point to.

What Dr. Wilson shows repeatedly is that most wannabe experts consistently rely on grade-D studies + feelings and vibes to try to counter grade-A++ studies only to be contrarian and stand out.

Dr. Wilson is a solid scientist.

This doesn't mean that "science" is always right, it means that we can reliably BET on the solid science we have at the moment and we will be right more often than not. Especially when putting it against guys like RFK.

 

[ChrisZoZo]

10 hours ago, Gennadiy1981 said:

 

I am reading your comments and people you have lost your minds. Are you serious? Did anyone even bother to read what this photo was supposed to be for? All of you look like zombies here. This photo was made to demonstrate a point and Al of you took it as a fact. Wake up all of you, you are going into deep slumber. What is wrong with all of you? You seem like you’re hypnotized. I wonder did anyone even bothered to read why this photo was even taken and what point was try to bring across? 

 

 Can’t see any info on this can you share. I had a good look at the image it seems very sound. Ai would struggle with reflection but it’s perfectly delt with here.

[zurew]

@zazen That can be used for a possible explanation for distrust - but there is a difference between providing an explanation for why people distrust mainstream media and institutions in general and why they are anti establishtment vs trying to claim that the reasoning that those people use is actually rational and a good position to have.

There are a bunch of explanations that can be provided why people are irrational and vibe based, but that explanation doesn't change the fact that they are irrational to hold on to the postion that they have.

Its like your mother lie to you about santa clause and from then on you will just assume that she will lie about everything else and you dont evaluate each claim she makes on its on merits.

To justify the  usage of the heruistic of "I will never trust anything my mother says , because I will just assume that she will lie" you will need to provide a much more complex reasoning. And even after that reasoning is established - the usage of a heruistic will always be epistemically conquered by the specific evaluation of the given claim your mother makes - and for that you need to actually engage with the specific data and evaluate that data on its own merits without relying on any specific kind of heruistic.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:52 PM by zurew

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Recursoinominado said:

What Dr. Wilson shows repeatedly is that most wannabe experts consistently rely on grade-D studies + feelings and vibes to try to counter grade-A++ studies only to be contrarian and stand out.

Dr. Wilson is a solid scientist.

This doesn't mean that "science" is always right, it means that we can reliably BET on the solid science we have at the moment and we will be right more often than not. Especially when putting it against guys like RFK.

Okay I was under the impression that RFK had the same level of qualifications and quality of research as other experts giving him an equal weigh in the opinion. 

Edited Tuesday at 03:35 PM by Salvijus

[Joshe]

Anyone not on the ground in America or who has not spent considerable time here does not really know Americans. The average American is not pissed at government. They’re caught up in the fantasies and drama of their own lives. For the ones who are pissed at the government, they’ve mostly been led to that position slowly, guided by memes that appeal to their egos, Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump, Christian Ideologues, etc.

I watched it all happen in real time. Here’s the truth of it. Trump caused a lot of polarization, which created a lot of collective guilt, which created a big market to relieve that guilt. Anyone who could effectively relieve it was a hot commodity. This is where Fox News came in - specifically, Tucker Carlson. Carlson’s whole shtick was the dems are the establishment and the establishment is bad. He spent an hour every night on prime time TV, on the nation's most watched show on television, spinning his bullshit to capture those people and turn their guilt into self-righteous indignation towards the big bad establishment who enables the immigrants, blacks, gays, and trans. People ate it up, not because they were tuned into the evil ways of the establishment, but because they needed good reasons to justify their expanding embrace of Trump and their expanding disdain of blacks, gays, trans, etc. So, Tucker channeled their guilt into self-righteous indignation via anger and snake oil, which was directed towards the Democrats, AKA, the left, AKA, the establishment. 

Obviously, this isn't the whole story but it's an important chapter.

I KNOW Americans. They’re the only people I’ve ever known, and I’ve watched them morph into something. The morphology can be traced back. You don’t know Americans just by seeing them on the internet or visiting once or twice.

Edited Tuesday at 04:31 PM by Joshe