4 ms·
Take a look at http://whatstheharm.net/ http://whatstheharm.net/ That should give you a better idea of what harms alternative medicine quackery can cause.
by driverdan 6y ago
Take a look at http://whatstheharm.net/ http://whatstheharm.net/
That should give you a better idea of what harms alternative medicine quackery can cause.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoI have no doubt that believing dumb things can cause you to make bad decisions. I just don't agree that being wrong is "dangerous" in the normal sense of the word, and I don't think that banning people from saying dumb things is a good or effective solution. It's another story when people are actively running interference. I've seen messages like "don't go to the doctor for your cancer", and I agree those should be suppressed. But that doesn't seem to be what's happening here.
- michaelmrose 6y agoImagine a population of 1 user. A user puts of a video advertised as instructions for doing a dangerous task while leaving out vitally important steps necessary to the user actually performing the task safely. The user follows instructions and promptly dies. The user was responsible for their own actions but nonetheless its hard to argue that if we left the video up after we had identified the issue led we and the author are both complicit. We should have taken down the video. The user is still free to host their own videos but it wont achieve as much of an audience without the benefit of the platform. Imagine a population of 1 million users. In one timeline evil, stupid misinformation isn't spread around and 1000 people die. In another timeline it is spread around and 10000 people die. Warning labels can't help here because most of the people negatively effected are multiple steps removed from such a label. Like the first example we should have reduced its audience by taking it down entirely not added a warning label that 50-80% wont attend to.