3 ms·
Uhhh, that was a joke, bro. Yes I am aware of the etiology of diabetes. But ultimately: my point is factual and stands -the main result of using biotech to tre
by scottlocklin 7y ago
Uhhh, that was a joke, bro. Yes I am aware of the etiology of diabetes.
But ultimately: my point is factual and stands -the main result of using biotech to treat diabetes is to allow more fat people to make themselves sick without killing more pigs and horses. Which is how diabetics were treated in the old days; with pig and horse insulin.
- scarface74 7y agoSo it was “a joke”, factually incorrect, but you still defend it and say that by pointing out that you were factually incorrect, it prevented you from “getting anything useful done” and that it was “regressive”. And if you are aware of the “etiology of diabetes” how was it useful to spread a falsehood? You asked which fact was proved false - here it is. Would the book you want to write also be full of factually incorrect “jokes”?
- scottlocklin 7y agoAs I said: there is nothing factually incorrect in my statement, and it's not my fault you can't parse humor.
- scarface74 7y agoHow is it not factually incorrect that diabetes - and thus the need for insulin - is not always caused by overeating, is factually incorrect?
- scottlocklin 7y agoThat was not even remotely my statement. Why are you persisting in this?
- scarface74 7y ago“Making insulin in toilet water is a neat trick, but all that really does is allow fat people to eat more sugar without slaughtering horses and pigs.”
- scottlocklin 7y agoGreat; I'm glad we're all on the same page now! Please tell me how this is a statement on or misunderstanding of the etiology of diabetes? Or is your argument "I am offended by Locklin's jokes?"
- scarface74 7y agoReally? The “etiology of diabetes” is not about just “fat people”. Would it also be a "joke" to say autism is caused by vaccines just because some ignorant people think that?