3 ms·

Oh, way to bury the lede. > You can’t improve what you don’t measure. If you’re trying to get more fiber—or to optimize other heart health nutrients like satur

Oh, way to bury the lede. > You can’t improve what you don’t measure. If you’re trying to get more fiber—or to optimize other heart health nutrients like saturated fat, sodium, and potassium—Empirical Health is designed to make tracking very easy. You can’t improve what you can’t measure and our product coincidentally helps you measure this.

NotMichaelBay 1y ago
That's good that they "buried the lede", isn't it? Better than the product being mentioned early and often throughout the article.
- WrongOnInternet 1y ago
  Or the price of said product ($190)
  - brandonb 1y ago
    FYI: $190 is the price for the comprehensive health panel which includes a blood test and video visit with a doctor. You can track nutrition for free within the iPhone/Android apps.
- brandonb 1y ago
  (OP) Yep--this is my philosophy. Obviously I'd love it if everybody used our product to improve their heart health, but I think it's better to write stuff that's informative and if people genuinely have the problem, then they can try us out.
- BigTTYGothGF 1y ago
  No, because then you'd have wasted time reading what turned out to be ad copy.
  - NotMichaelBay 1y ago
    You're implying that the article has no value because its purpose is to attract readers to ultimately make a purchase. But if you're trying to attract readers, arguably the best way to do that is to provide something of value to them. If the goal is to attract readers without providing any value at all, it's extremely easy to do that nowadays with AI. And luckily it's just as easy to identify low-effort articles written by AI.
    - red-iron-pine 1y ago
      bollocks. now I have to question the validity of their statements since it's 100% clear they have a profit motive. the hard part is that there may be legitimate benefits to fiber, but a claim that there is almost a quarter difference in mortality strains credulity. obvious snake oil is obvious, but this is likely snake oil masquerading as real

NotMichaelBay 1y ago

That's good that they "buried the lede", isn't it? Better than the product being mentioned early and often throughout the article.

WrongOnInternet 1y ago
Or the price of said product ($190)
- brandonb 1y ago
  FYI: $190 is the price for the comprehensive health panel which includes a blood test and video visit with a doctor. You can track nutrition for free within the iPhone/Android apps.
brandonb 1y ago
(OP) Yep--this is my philosophy. Obviously I'd love it if everybody used our product to improve their heart health, but I think it's better to write stuff that's informative and if people genuinely have the problem, then they can try us out.
BigTTYGothGF 1y ago
No, because then you'd have wasted time reading what turned out to be ad copy.
- NotMichaelBay 1y ago
  You're implying that the article has no value because its purpose is to attract readers to ultimately make a purchase. But if you're trying to attract readers, arguably the best way to do that is to provide something of value to them. If the goal is to attract readers without providing any value at all, it's extremely easy to do that nowadays with AI. And luckily it's just as easy to identify low-effort articles written by AI.
  - red-iron-pine 1y ago
    bollocks. now I have to question the validity of their statements since it's 100% clear they have a profit motive. the hard part is that there may be legitimate benefits to fiber, but a claim that there is almost a quarter difference in mortality strains credulity. obvious snake oil is obvious, but this is likely snake oil masquerading as real