4 ms·
Which is a very different question than whether or not it worked. After all, people pay billions every year on useless nutritional supplements which have a lot
by brycesbeard 7y ago
Which is a very different question than whether or not it worked. After all, people pay billions every year on useless nutritional supplements which have a lot of evidence to suggest they don’t work as people think.
Yet they still pay. People are irrational.
- baddox 7y agoWouldn’t the better analogy here be money spent on marketing supplements, which does in fact seem to work?
- GreeniFi 7y agoGood point. I know I should not extrapolate from one data point, and by way of example after a friend joined FB about 2 years ago, I have noticed a progressive change in their viewpoints. Although a trained scientist, they now talk frequently about (1) anti-vaccination, (2) chemtrails, (3) climate change hoax,(4) Soros, (5) Brexit. My hypothesis is that hawkers of nonsense use FB to identify people interested in one of the above and then bombard them with recommends. After all, we behave according to our lived experience - and if social media platforms are used to alter the perception of lived experience, then logic dictates that they can sway behaviour. Should I be smug? Absolutely not! I have little idea where my opinions come from.