antivax foundation founder Fauci
I think you mean RFK Jr? Fauci was and probably still is very much in favor of vaccines.
Tylenol and vaccines cause autism
If you trust two doctors and they give different medical advice, and you only accept one as accurate, does that mean you stop trusting the first doctor? No. People can be wrong sometimes, so it's fine.
RFK Jr isn't even a doctor, he was a lawyer turned politician. I think it's reasonable to trust that he's doing his best even when he misinterprets medical studies, especially when he's under the gun to get an answer by a specific date (he said he'd "solve" autism by September, and that announcement was made at the end of September).
To be clear, I don't trust RFK Jr or Trump, I'm merely providing what I think is a reasonable explanation of the survey results. I think it's logically reasonable to trust your local doctor for your personal medical needs, and also trust RFK Jr for setting nationwide policy, even if he's wrong sometimes on specifics.
Idk what politics sub you’re looking at, politics@lemmy.world is not locked
!politics@sh.itjust.works. That's the instance we're on, and without any further information, that's what I'm going to assume since this discussion is about sh.itjust.works policy.
Here are some sources that I find sketchy on !politics@lemmy.world:
- friendlyathiest.com - not a news source, looks like a newsletter by one person?
- talkingpointsmemo.com - strong left bias, "mostly factual"
- rawstory.com - strong left bias, "mostly factual"
- thedailybeast.com - strong left bias, "mixed" factuality
That's just from the first page or two of results. A "mostly factual" post here and there is probably fine, but having several posts in the first page or two is concerning. Maybe mods remove even worse posts, idk, I don't sub there.
And honestly, this is fine, because generally speaking, the mods seem to do a good job removing the worst of it.
We don't know if maga.place will be run that way, or if they'll be a firehose of misinformation.
The entire MAGA movement is based on misinformation.
I don't know if that's actually fair. The MAGA movement is large, and a lot of them are frustrated with the current administration that's the face of the MAGA movement, so there's more division than cohesion IMO. The only thing they seem to agree on is "owning the libs," but they get mad when there's collateral damage to themselves.
That said, we don't know where on the spectrum of "MAGA" this instance is. Maybe they just picked the name because they thought it would be funny to "own the libs," or maybe they're actually a psyop. Until we know, I don't think we should defederate.