89
What did you think you would never see and are disappointed every time you see it? (piefed.world)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
133 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The problem with science is that consensus changes but often with tremendous lag.

The whole anti-fat movement I grew up in, for instance. It never made sense to me so I've always been a fan of fat. I always eat my chicken skins, always eat (at least chew) the fat on my steaks.

People used to worry about cholesterol a lot but then we found out dietary cholesterol doesn't really matter for most people.

Turns out sugar is a lot worse than fat for you. Which they knew back then but industries being what they are ... They use money to influence the research. Now they're finally removing the refined sugars but now they're pumping like three, four maybe five artificial sweeteners in there and pretty much all of them are linked to various problems...

That's great for science, when done honestly, it's striving to be better and it can change when it needs to. But these days there's a lot of bad science out there and it can be difficult to discern what is good science from what is total bullshit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Nothing is ever 'pure.'

    The old name for Down's Syndrome was Mongoloid Idiocy, because mostly European doctors thought the eye folds made people look 'Asiatic.'

    The point is that you have people who are trying to discover an objective truth, and people who think that their Truth is already perfect.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    this is why a lot of folks don't think science is real though, because it doesn't produce eternal truths that simplistic and easy to understand in simple algebra F = ma. Once you go to mechanics and calculus, you lose them and it's magic and wizards.

    they think the fact you can make Pluto not a planet means science is just shit people make up on a whim. and they aren't wrong, in principle. it is made up shit, but it's done by consensus of peer-reviewed experts often over years and decades of work pointing us to a new conclusion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    There's no point to follow the money. You follow the science. Both good and bad science are funded by drum roll please money!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] [S] -1 points 2 months ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    I don't like who funded this, therefore the conclusion is suspect.

    That's a genetic fallacy.

    Scientific claims should be evaluated by evidence rather than by identifying a villain behind the funding.

    Suppose you follow the money and discover that the research was funded by an organization you consider trustworthy. Does that make the science good? If not, then following the money isn't actually what determines whether the science is good, is it?

    Me? Defeatist. And you meant that unironically didn't you... 😂

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)