5 ms·

That exact sentiment is the reason for this problem even existing. Peer review and medical journals are by no means exempt from usual human corruptions, and the

That exact sentiment is the reason for this problem even existing. Peer review and medical journals are by no means exempt from usual human corruptions, and there is absolutely no rational way to say that certain concerns should only be allowed there, and that we should not be able to even discuss them outside of those closed circles.

Arkhaine_kupo 6y ago
> Peer review and medical journals are by no means exempt from usual human corruptions Individual instances can be found, and errors do happen. However the idea that the biggest pharma companies, integrated by incredibly talented and hardworking people, and every safety institution (The american FDA, the EU security council etc) are all so compromised as to miss real problems and purposefully endanger the population is in my humble opinion absurd. What is the societal advantage on letting a baker share his uninformed opinion on epidemiology? Why let software engineers discuss the safety standards of the medical field? A ton of the situations and problems are heavily skewed to high technical knowledge of narrow field. I have no idea about how many volunteers are a good number to run a vaccine experiment, I have no idea what a good control group vaccine looks like or why use HepB and not measles. Me sharing my opinions on this topic only pollutes the conversation when I do not have the background knowledge to form an opinion on it. If you look for information on this topics it would be much better for society if my blog is not there and there is information from actual doctors and epidemiologists talking about it.
- Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
  You don't seem to fully grasp the importance of free speech is and what it has done for the western society. What you are advocating is supressing speech, however clever little reasons you might have tried to find for it. None of the problems you described come even close to the clusterfuck of hurt we are going to experience in the society (and that other societies did and still do) if we are going to start supressing speech.
  - Arkhaine_kupo 6y ago
    First of all, there is nowhere the concept of free speech, there are ALWAYS limits. Europe has more limits than America but both have limits. Second, as any right free speech comes with certain responsibilities. My point is education people in using their right appropriately. Lets get all Spiderman, great power comes great responsability. The right to free speech comes with the responsability to know when to shut up. Letting professionals speak and have the floor during events that concern their domain knowledge is a basic pre-requisite for the good ideas to flourish.
    - fuzxi 6y ago
      I know more about human rights than you. Stop talking. ^ That's what you sound like.

Arkhaine_kupo 6y ago

> Peer review and medical journals are by no means exempt from usual human corruptions Individual instances can be found, and errors do happen. However the idea that the biggest pharma companies, integrated by incredibly talented and hardworking people, and every safety institution (The american FDA, the EU security council etc) are all so compromised as to miss real problems and purposefully endanger the population is in my humble opinion absurd. What is the societal advantage on letting a baker share his uninformed opinion on epidemiology? Why let software engineers discuss the safety standards of the medical field? A ton of the situations and problems are heavily skewed to high technical knowledge of narrow field. I have no idea about how many volunteers are a good number to run a vaccine experiment, I have no idea what a good control group vaccine looks like or why use HepB and not measles. Me sharing my opinions on this topic only pollutes the conversation when I do not have the background knowledge to form an opinion on it. If you look for information on this topics it would be much better for society if my blog is not there and there is information from actual doctors and epidemiologists talking about it.

Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
You don't seem to fully grasp the importance of free speech is and what it has done for the western society. What you are advocating is supressing speech, however clever little reasons you might have tried to find for it. None of the problems you described come even close to the clusterfuck of hurt we are going to experience in the society (and that other societies did and still do) if we are going to start supressing speech.
- Arkhaine_kupo 6y ago
  First of all, there is nowhere the concept of free speech, there are ALWAYS limits. Europe has more limits than America but both have limits. Second, as any right free speech comes with certain responsibilities. My point is education people in using their right appropriately. Lets get all Spiderman, great power comes great responsability. The right to free speech comes with the responsability to know when to shut up. Letting professionals speak and have the floor during events that concern their domain knowledge is a basic pre-requisite for the good ideas to flourish.
  - fuzxi 6y ago
    I know more about human rights than you. Stop talking. ^ That's what you sound like.