4 ms·

The word "substantial" is very vague and a bad sign for any scientific and evidence-based publication. Then, when such news show up while Trump is trying to ma

The word "substantial" is very vague and a bad sign for any scientific and evidence-based publication. Then, when such news show up while Trump is trying to make his deal with the Chinese and (it seems) even got a hostage recently, this makes me feel a bit suspicious of this article, especially since its content is pay-walled. (I'm not defending organ-harvesting, which was already reported in the past, but the article must be specific about what has or has not happened, and should not use such vague statements.)

ArchTypical 8y ago
> The word "substantial" is very vague and a bad sign for any scientific and evidence-based publication. That's true. Have an upvote. There are some troubling stats that can be pulled up in regard to transplant stats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go... Admittedly, it's a little backhanded to complain about the accuracy of statistics that are intentionally withheld by a totalitarian dystopian regime. Downvoted, but relevant all the same: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18611084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18611084
malmsteen 8y ago
Tbh you can see a conpiracy everywhere, even with your comment for example: you could be geniunely suspicious. Or you could be a die hard trump supporter who prefer to say its suspicious because you don't like that attacking china whill lead in the future to attacking trump policy. I wonder which one
- a-nikolaev 8y ago
  Well, if Trump say something about this topic on TV in the next couple of days, then I'm right. In any case, they promise to deliver a full report on that investigation in early 2019, hopefully it will be more informative. (My main point is not that the article might be politically motivated, but that its main statement is very imprecise and allows interpretations.)
throwba43yt 8y ago
I agree. All this “bad” news about China recently seems odd.

ArchTypical 8y ago

> The word "substantial" is very vague and a bad sign for any scientific and evidence-based publication. That's true. Have an upvote. There are some troubling stats that can be pulled up in regard to transplant stats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go... Admittedly, it's a little backhanded to complain about the accuracy of statistics that are intentionally withheld by a totalitarian dystopian regime. Downvoted, but relevant all the same: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18611084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18611084

malmsteen 8y ago

Tbh you can see a conpiracy everywhere, even with your comment for example: you could be geniunely suspicious. Or you could be a die hard trump supporter who prefer to say its suspicious because you don't like that attacking china whill lead in the future to attacking trump policy. I wonder which one

a-nikolaev 8y ago
Well, if Trump say something about this topic on TV in the next couple of days, then I'm right. In any case, they promise to deliver a full report on that investigation in early 2019, hopefully it will be more informative. (My main point is not that the article might be politically motivated, but that its main statement is very imprecise and allows interpretations.)

throwba43yt 8y ago

I agree. All this “bad” news about China recently seems odd.