3 ms·

There is a big difference between believing something cured you, and publicly promoting something as a cure. I see this all the time in various social media co

There is a big difference between believing something cured you, and publicly promoting something as a cure. I see this all the time in various social media communities: For example, people with an autoimmune diseases that got better after eliminating dairy or starting to take willow bark supplements or whatever. The moment they see a benefit, they jump on Reddit or YouTube or whatever to promote it as a cure and tell everyone to do the same thing as them. Promoting an extremely specific medical treatment without evidence larger than N=1 is both unethical and scientifically sloppy. At least you could bother to temper the advice with some caveats. But apparently everyone on social media can be a medical authority these days, and giving out medical advice without a license is okay.

DANmode 11mo ago
Are you talking about me? Notice how I said nothing about a "cure" – that was actually only found in the contents of your trigger-happy response. You're correct about the phenomenon you're referring to existing. You're not correct about everyone you think you're observing it in. Obviously.
- atombender 11mo ago
  You're heavily implying it is a cure, yes. Even if it's not a cure, you're still irresponsibly peddling an unproven medical treatment that has no established effect other than yourself, so my point stands. You have no particular reason to believe it works on anyone else because you haven't tried it on anyone else. This type of pseudoscience doesn't belong on HN.
  - DANmode 11mo ago
    Antibacterial herbs, with gobs of research, and even a study or two, supporting their efficacy for the targeted microbes, are pseudoscience? I’m heavily implying nothing. My recommendation to address Lyme and coinfections like Bab and Bart in this way (in addition to antibiotics, if you choose) is from research and then personal experience. Respectfully: do better, if you want to try and tell people what belongs where.

DANmode 11mo ago

Are you talking about me? Notice how I said nothing about a "cure" – that was actually only found in the contents of your trigger-happy response. You're correct about the phenomenon you're referring to existing. You're not correct about everyone you think you're observing it in. Obviously.

atombender 11mo ago
You're heavily implying it is a cure, yes. Even if it's not a cure, you're still irresponsibly peddling an unproven medical treatment that has no established effect other than yourself, so my point stands. You have no particular reason to believe it works on anyone else because you haven't tried it on anyone else. This type of pseudoscience doesn't belong on HN.
- DANmode 11mo ago
  Antibacterial herbs, with gobs of research, and even a study or two, supporting their efficacy for the targeted microbes, are pseudoscience? I’m heavily implying nothing. My recommendation to address Lyme and coinfections like Bab and Bart in this way (in addition to antibiotics, if you choose) is from research and then personal experience. Respectfully: do better, if you want to try and tell people what belongs where.