3 ms·

But the lie was overcome by the efforts of countless dietary researchers employed at major institutions, so it was not at all a conspiracy of all the scientists

But the lie was overcome by the efforts of countless dietary researchers employed at major institutions, so it was not at all a conspiracy of all the scientists. That is quite the contrary of what the people who have declared war on science are claiming.

coldtea 8y ago
>But the lie was overcome by the efforts of countless dietary researchers employed at major institutions, so it was not at all a conspiracy of all the scientists. It's never "a conspiracy of all the scientists". It doesn't take one either. You just need to spread enough of your own brand of "scientific results" to be able to sell to the public. It doesn't even have to be the most prestigious research -- you can pay to have the press releases appear in all kinds of magazines as "fact". That's what the food industry has been done for ages with tons of research on the benefits of this or that ingredient, or promoting this or that kind of diet (depending on the manufacturer). It helps that those doing it are not just some regular food company making $100 million per year (and which doesn't have much clout), but huge conglomerates like Coca Cola, Nestle and co, that control a large part of the processed food market. >That is quite the contrary of what the people who have declared war on science are claiming. When people revolt against something, it's important to distinguish some general sentiment and its context, from what some of them might be literally saying. A large mass movement can never articulate itself well -- they move in platitudes, often opt for the easiest slogans, and often have more people attached who are not the most representative, just the most vocal (and extreme). Rosa Parks, for example, might have gone as "I should be able to sit in front of the bus", but the gesture actually meant "I want to be treated as equal, period".

coldtea 8y ago

>But the lie was overcome by the efforts of countless dietary researchers employed at major institutions, so it was not at all a conspiracy of all the scientists. It's never "a conspiracy of all the scientists". It doesn't take one either. You just need to spread enough of your own brand of "scientific results" to be able to sell to the public. It doesn't even have to be the most prestigious research -- you can pay to have the press releases appear in all kinds of magazines as "fact". That's what the food industry has been done for ages with tons of research on the benefits of this or that ingredient, or promoting this or that kind of diet (depending on the manufacturer). It helps that those doing it are not just some regular food company making $100 million per year (and which doesn't have much clout), but huge conglomerates like Coca Cola, Nestle and co, that control a large part of the processed food market. >That is quite the contrary of what the people who have declared war on science are claiming. When people revolt against something, it's important to distinguish some general sentiment and its context, from what some of them might be literally saying. A large mass movement can never articulate itself well -- they move in platitudes, often opt for the easiest slogans, and often have more people attached who are not the most representative, just the most vocal (and extreme). Rosa Parks, for example, might have gone as "I should be able to sit in front of the bus", but the gesture actually meant "I want to be treated as equal, period".