4 ms·

The more discerning question to ask is: In that video, Alex Jones was quoting (in his own, 'passionate' way) a study that linked Atrazine (a widely used herbic

The more discerning question to ask is: In that video, Alex Jones was quoting (in his own, 'passionate' way) a study that linked Atrazine (a widely used herbicide) to hormonal disturbances[0]. Mainstream media had access to the same study. Why was he the only one (besides niche, specialized publications) talking about it, or the numerous studies like it, including some in humans? Why were the media, governments, and celebrities, who often promote issues ranging from important to frivolous[1], silent on this? Where were the reproductive rights groups, on this issue that relates directly to people's rights not to have their fertility attacked by Big Agro lobby groups? Why was Alex Jones directly attacked, quite aggressively, and even denounced as "anti-LGBT" [2] for his video? One can argue it's because of his "style", but why did the media universally denounce it as a "dangerous conspiracy theory" instead of simply covering the issue more dispassionately? Was the US National Academy of Sciences targeted with these same labels when it published[3] the original study? No need to; there was no way a scientific paper itself would go viral. But coverage of it was suppressed. Why? Cue 2021: "Reproductive Problems in Both Men and Women Are Rising at an Alarming Rate", Scientific American[4]. Oh, really? Note: do not mistake this commment for a plaudit of Alex Jones. It is a study in narrative control. -- [0]: Study: Atrazine induces complete feminization and chemical castration in male African clawed frogs (Xenopus laevis) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ [1]: just today, the White House released a memorandum highlighting the issue of "women and LGBTQI+ political leaders, public figures, activists, and journalists" who are "survivors" of online harassment https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/06/16/memorandum-on-the-establishment-of-the-white-house-task-force-to-address-online-harassment-and-abuse/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action... [2]: Find in Page -> "frog" https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaad-releases-background-information-conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-record-anti-lgbtq-activism https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaad-releases-background-informa... [3]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ [4]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reproductive-problems-in-both-men-and-women-are-rising-at-an-alarming-rate/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reproductive-prob...

Terry_Roll 4y ago
But is it permanent? I'm sure some chemicals can undo the fear & anxiety. As our knowledge increases we invent new ways to decrease the population. Knowledge is power.
samhyde69 4y ago
doodlebugging 4y ago
Your [3] reference is not the original study. Some of the original studies were late 80's, early 90's and were discussed in the media even on the nightly news. They were printed in magazines that people at the time subscribed to. The discussion about the issue died down and was later resurrected by those who published that article. The original time period when this was in the news would be 1995-1998 since I know where I worked at the time. I don't know why it did not stick in the public's consciousness back in the 90's. I do know that it faded from the news stream over time only to be resurrected years later when the issues that were highlighted had affected a much larger number of people.

Terry_Roll 4y ago

But is it permanent? I'm sure some chemicals can undo the fear & anxiety. As our knowledge increases we invent new ways to decrease the population. Knowledge is power.

samhyde69 4y ago

doodlebugging 4y ago

Your [3] reference is not the original study. Some of the original studies were late 80's, early 90's and were discussed in the media even on the nightly news. They were printed in magazines that people at the time subscribed to. The discussion about the issue died down and was later resurrected by those who published that article. The original time period when this was in the news would be 1995-1998 since I know where I worked at the time. I don't know why it did not stick in the public's consciousness back in the 90's. I do know that it faded from the news stream over time only to be resurrected years later when the issues that were highlighted had affected a much larger number of people.