6 ms·

I don't want to google "crunchy Karen" at work...can someone post a description here?

by oneepic 7y ago

reneherse 7y ago
Seems like a misogynist stereotype used to unthinkingly dismiss an argument.
- filoleg 7y ago
  idk man, I feel kinda ok with dismissing antivax/essential oils/healing crystals theories. Especially considering how many children got harmed (some to the point of death) by "crunchy karens" who decided that they know better than modern medicine and doctors. While every topic deserves to be questioned and not dismissed, some have been argued to death already, and I would feel ok with not getting into an argument about the merit of vaccines for a while.
  - wdbbdw 7y ago
    Conflating microbiome interests with antivax mania doesn't make any sense to me, and I agree that "crunchy Karen" is a dismissive sexist tropE, especially in this context. Do any of you have even a passing familiarity with modern microbiome research? It's super fascinating and I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.
    - dmix 7y ago
      Last I've read from someone who knew what they are talking about, he said it's still very early and we don't yet know enough to apply treatment level stuff with biomes. A lot of people are optimistic for the future and there's some useful research available currently such as helping identify certain issues, but it's not yet a serious clinical option being pushed anywhere as far as changing or influencing the biome.
    - bitwize 7y ago
      Most of us have heard of it. You can't log into this site and not hear of it. "Gut bacteria" is a square (alongside the likes of "Rust" and "Bitcoin") on my Hackernews bingo card. But there are scientifically validated treatments and then there's folk medicine of unknown safety and effectiveness, and putting gauze swabbed with vagina juice in your baby's mouth sounds a lot like the latter.
      - wdbbdw 7y ago
        I dunno, after having had a front row seat to more than one vaginal birth I'd say that it's implausible to suggest that microbes aren't being transferred (via "vagina juice" and the proverbial "microbial organ", i.e. poop) from mother to baby. Also, having dabbled in microbial ecology in my professional life, I'd say that it's unlikely that said microbial transfer is inconsequential for the gut health of the baby. Doctors don't know everything, and I'd venture that effectively no research on the effects of a cesarian on the baby's gut health was done before the procedure became widespread.
        extipion 7y ago
        > Doctors don't know everything, and I'd venture that effectively no research on the effects of a cesarian on the baby's gut health was done before the procedure became widespread. You’d venture wrong. The initial studies demonstrating flora differences date well over 20 years. It was in fact probably a pop science article in some mass media outlet poorly citing one of those papers that got the ball rolling for this seeding practice in the first place. And did you bother to read the TfA? As mentioned there is no evidence that the biome is influenced by vaginal flora. So there is absolutely no new support for the value of vaginal seeding. Doctors may not know everything, but many of us know what we don’t know which is why we don’t recommend seeding. There is no evidence that it works nor that it does any good. This new study only further supports this hypothesis.
        wdbbdw 7y ago
        Uh, oops, right. I hadn't read tfa.
    - filoleg 7y ago
      Oh, I am not dismissing the microbiome research. As evidenced by the comments in this thread, it seems that it is even taught in nursing/med schools. I think the parent just described the type of person who brings it up to doctors, not that this specific technique should be dismissed. But I would dismiss any non-conventional medical theory from non-educated (in medical field) people, even if it proves to be correct in the future. When the research and appropriate studies are done (and they prove the initial hypothesis), I will gladly switch my opinion.
    - fromthestart 7y ago
      > agree that "crunchy Karen" is a dismissive sexist tropE So we're not allowed to use labels to draw attention to the fact that the majority of people who believe in [1] and spread information about things like spirituality, crystals, anti-vax, anti-gmo, etc are women? Often times x-ist tropes are rooted in reality. Dancing around these associations doesn't do anyone any actual good beyond cheap virtue signaling. 1. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-beliefs-common-among-both-religious-and-nonreligious-americans/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-bel...
  - samstave 7y ago
    The only issue I have had with vaccines, I have three daughters, all vaccinated; but I just don’t like how they cram like six vaccines into a single doctor visit. My middle daughter got the chicken pox vaccine right before we went on vacation to Chicago. When we got to Chicago, she got the chicken pox actually from the vaccine. I was there for work and wife and daughter were supposed to be fiddling about the city while I worked during the day building the salesforce office. Instead, they were holed up in the hotel room with calamine lotion and bath stuff to make Madeline comfortable. Since she had the chicken pox, they were only supposed to stay a week in Chicago with me, but had to stay the whole two weeks I was there as she couldn’t fly with the pox.... So when my youngest was due for all her vaccines, they wanted to give all 6 to her at one time. And as the kids feel really lethargic and crappy for several days after, I made the doctor split the vaccines into only two at a time and made three different visits over two weeks instead of six vaccines in one visit and it was a much better experience for Coraline.
    - gehwartzen 7y ago
      Same here. Our son has gotten all the required vaceenes but we also opted for two at a time max. Aside from being less convenient (2-3x as many visits) he still had all his shots by the time they were needed. Maybe it makes no difference but it certainly seems less taxing overall to the immune system.
    - tptacek 7y ago
      This is apparently one of the better-studied questions about immunization, and the verdict is that multiple simultaneous vaccinations does not increase the risk of side effects.
      - kazinator 7y ago
        Surely, that depends on how you frame it? Tossing three coins doesn't increase the odds of any one of them being heads, surely enough. But tossing them at the same time as a single combined trial, instead of just one coin, does increase the odds of at least one heads showing up from 50 to 87.5%. Of course, you're going to have all those vaccines anyway and so the odds are the same overall for those administrations. Just like it doesn't matter whether we toss three coins at the same time, or weeks apart; the odds are 87.5% we will see a head. But grandparent has a point about a situation like getting multiple vaccines before travel, where you're making it more likely that side effect will occur during that specific inconvenient time.
- bitwize 7y ago
  Go you for aspiring to the lofty levels of discourse exemplified by places like Tumblr, and immediately flagging expressions they don't like as "sexist" or "misogynistic" without any context for how they're used and who's using them. You missed your chance for bonus good-boy points by using "alt-right" or "incel".
tyingq 7y ago
Guessing "crunchy" means something like "prone to like questionable homeopathic practices" Think long hair, sundresses, sandals, cracked wheat bread, flax seed extract, colonic cleanses, healing crystals, etc. The story, though, might validate this particular practice.
maxlamb 7y ago
it pretty much means a modern-day hippie.
bitwize 7y ago
"Crunchy Karen" is a stock character who advocates dubious medical practices and preaches moralizingly, patronizingly to others to do the same. Where I got the term from is a friend of mine is part of a Facebook support group for women who have particularly unproductive breasts and are tired of being told to risk starving their babies by adopting a breastfeeding-only policy or face moral recriminations.
- core-questions 7y ago
  Yeah, I don't get this. My kids are breast-fed and obviously there's a lot of evidence it's a good idea, but why would I need to shame / bother people who can't do this? It's their loss, if anything.
  - aaron695 7y ago
    Some mother can't, shaming them doesn't help, but the harsh reality is kids will still come out worse off without breast feeding with current technology, irrelevant if the mother is capable or not. It's a line between causing hurt for something unavoidable and promoting something important for when it can be avoided. Public campaigns use shame, the crossover is unavoidable, you can only try to reduce it for when it's not constructive, hence the shame of shaming campaign we are discussing here but it crosses over into the important original shame campaign. Create baby formula that's better than breast milk and we can tech our way out of the whole issue.
conception 7y ago
Others got the Karen part but crunchy comes from "granola parents" who are doing trendy "health" things.

I don't want to google "crunchy Karen" at work...can someone post a description here?

reneherse 7y ago

Seems like a misogynist stereotype used to unthinkingly dismiss an argument.

filoleg 7y ago
idk man, I feel kinda ok with dismissing antivax/essential oils/healing crystals theories. Especially considering how many children got harmed (some to the point of death) by "crunchy karens" who decided that they know better than modern medicine and doctors. While every topic deserves to be questioned and not dismissed, some have been argued to death already, and I would feel ok with not getting into an argument about the merit of vaccines for a while.
- wdbbdw 7y ago
  Conflating microbiome interests with antivax mania doesn't make any sense to me, and I agree that "crunchy Karen" is a dismissive sexist tropE, especially in this context. Do any of you have even a passing familiarity with modern microbiome research? It's super fascinating and I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it.
  - dmix 7y ago
    Last I've read from someone who knew what they are talking about, he said it's still very early and we don't yet know enough to apply treatment level stuff with biomes. A lot of people are optimistic for the future and there's some useful research available currently such as helping identify certain issues, but it's not yet a serious clinical option being pushed anywhere as far as changing or influencing the biome.
  - bitwize 7y ago
    Most of us have heard of it. You can't log into this site and not hear of it. "Gut bacteria" is a square (alongside the likes of "Rust" and "Bitcoin") on my Hackernews bingo card. But there are scientifically validated treatments and then there's folk medicine of unknown safety and effectiveness, and putting gauze swabbed with vagina juice in your baby's mouth sounds a lot like the latter.
    - wdbbdw 7y ago
      I dunno, after having had a front row seat to more than one vaginal birth I'd say that it's implausible to suggest that microbes aren't being transferred (via "vagina juice" and the proverbial "microbial organ", i.e. poop) from mother to baby. Also, having dabbled in microbial ecology in my professional life, I'd say that it's unlikely that said microbial transfer is inconsequential for the gut health of the baby. Doctors don't know everything, and I'd venture that effectively no research on the effects of a cesarian on the baby's gut health was done before the procedure became widespread.
      - extipion 7y ago
        > Doctors don't know everything, and I'd venture that effectively no research on the effects of a cesarian on the baby's gut health was done before the procedure became widespread. You’d venture wrong. The initial studies demonstrating flora differences date well over 20 years. It was in fact probably a pop science article in some mass media outlet poorly citing one of those papers that got the ball rolling for this seeding practice in the first place. And did you bother to read the TfA? As mentioned there is no evidence that the biome is influenced by vaginal flora. So there is absolutely no new support for the value of vaginal seeding. Doctors may not know everything, but many of us know what we don’t know which is why we don’t recommend seeding. There is no evidence that it works nor that it does any good. This new study only further supports this hypothesis.
        wdbbdw 7y ago
        Uh, oops, right. I hadn't read tfa.
  - filoleg 7y ago
    Oh, I am not dismissing the microbiome research. As evidenced by the comments in this thread, it seems that it is even taught in nursing/med schools. I think the parent just described the type of person who brings it up to doctors, not that this specific technique should be dismissed. But I would dismiss any non-conventional medical theory from non-educated (in medical field) people, even if it proves to be correct in the future. When the research and appropriate studies are done (and they prove the initial hypothesis), I will gladly switch my opinion.
  - fromthestart 7y ago
    > agree that "crunchy Karen" is a dismissive sexist tropE So we're not allowed to use labels to draw attention to the fact that the majority of people who believe in [1] and spread information about things like spirituality, crystals, anti-vax, anti-gmo, etc are women? Often times x-ist tropes are rooted in reality. Dancing around these associations doesn't do anyone any actual good beyond cheap virtue signaling. 1. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-beliefs-common-among-both-religious-and-nonreligious-americans/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-bel...
- samstave 7y ago
  The only issue I have had with vaccines, I have three daughters, all vaccinated; but I just don’t like how they cram like six vaccines into a single doctor visit. My middle daughter got the chicken pox vaccine right before we went on vacation to Chicago. When we got to Chicago, she got the chicken pox actually from the vaccine. I was there for work and wife and daughter were supposed to be fiddling about the city while I worked during the day building the salesforce office. Instead, they were holed up in the hotel room with calamine lotion and bath stuff to make Madeline comfortable. Since she had the chicken pox, they were only supposed to stay a week in Chicago with me, but had to stay the whole two weeks I was there as she couldn’t fly with the pox.... So when my youngest was due for all her vaccines, they wanted to give all 6 to her at one time. And as the kids feel really lethargic and crappy for several days after, I made the doctor split the vaccines into only two at a time and made three different visits over two weeks instead of six vaccines in one visit and it was a much better experience for Coraline.
  - gehwartzen 7y ago
    Same here. Our son has gotten all the required vaceenes but we also opted for two at a time max. Aside from being less convenient (2-3x as many visits) he still had all his shots by the time they were needed. Maybe it makes no difference but it certainly seems less taxing overall to the immune system.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    This is apparently one of the better-studied questions about immunization, and the verdict is that multiple simultaneous vaccinations does not increase the risk of side effects.
    - kazinator 7y ago
      Surely, that depends on how you frame it? Tossing three coins doesn't increase the odds of any one of them being heads, surely enough. But tossing them at the same time as a single combined trial, instead of just one coin, does increase the odds of at least one heads showing up from 50 to 87.5%. Of course, you're going to have all those vaccines anyway and so the odds are the same overall for those administrations. Just like it doesn't matter whether we toss three coins at the same time, or weeks apart; the odds are 87.5% we will see a head. But grandparent has a point about a situation like getting multiple vaccines before travel, where you're making it more likely that side effect will occur during that specific inconvenient time.
bitwize 7y ago
Go you for aspiring to the lofty levels of discourse exemplified by places like Tumblr, and immediately flagging expressions they don't like as "sexist" or "misogynistic" without any context for how they're used and who's using them. You missed your chance for bonus good-boy points by using "alt-right" or "incel".

tyingq 7y ago

Guessing "crunchy" means something like "prone to like questionable homeopathic practices" Think long hair, sundresses, sandals, cracked wheat bread, flax seed extract, colonic cleanses, healing crystals, etc. The story, though, might validate this particular practice.

maxlamb 7y ago

it pretty much means a modern-day hippie.

bitwize 7y ago

"Crunchy Karen" is a stock character who advocates dubious medical practices and preaches moralizingly, patronizingly to others to do the same. Where I got the term from is a friend of mine is part of a Facebook support group for women who have particularly unproductive breasts and are tired of being told to risk starving their babies by adopting a breastfeeding-only policy or face moral recriminations.

core-questions 7y ago
Yeah, I don't get this. My kids are breast-fed and obviously there's a lot of evidence it's a good idea, but why would I need to shame / bother people who can't do this? It's their loss, if anything.
- aaron695 7y ago
  Some mother can't, shaming them doesn't help, but the harsh reality is kids will still come out worse off without breast feeding with current technology, irrelevant if the mother is capable or not. It's a line between causing hurt for something unavoidable and promoting something important for when it can be avoided. Public campaigns use shame, the crossover is unavoidable, you can only try to reduce it for when it's not constructive, hence the shame of shaming campaign we are discussing here but it crosses over into the important original shame campaign. Create baby formula that's better than breast milk and we can tech our way out of the whole issue.

conception 7y ago

Others got the Karen part but crunchy comes from "granola parents" who are doing trendy "health" things.